Jun 12 2006

Tides Turning On The Left

Published by at 10:55 am under 2006 Elections,All General Discussions

I think America is ready to finally leave liberalism to the dustbin of history. Not all Americans – there will always be the KoS deadenders. But America as a whole will finally bury the movement this year. Mac Ranger points us to an illustrative piece at the Huffington Post as one life long liberal, who is my age, walks away from liberalism. The best line is this one:

Iraq is the “Normandy” of the War on Terror. The hope, once Iraq and Afghanistan are more stable, is that the nearly 70 million people in Iran will look at those countires (on it’s left and right borders) and say: “Why do these people get to vote, send their women to school, and buy Nikes and we don’t?” – and then topple their Mullah’s dictatorial regime. The President understands the big picture — that if the U.S. doesn’t help to remake that volatile region, we will face a nuclear version of 9/11 within the next two or five or 10 years. He is simply being realistic in his outlook and responsible in his actions.

The logic is well founded. I was going to write about the latest Democracy Corpse screed where Carville and Greenberg claim the future is bright for the left, if only they can take advantage of it. Well, the fact is the electorate is not turning to the left as it turns away from knee-jerk support of the right. It is rejecting both sides:

If the Democrats and challengers fail to show voters something more, this disillusionment could show itself in fragmentation to smaller parties and more likely, a stay-at-home protest. The current measures of potential Democratic turnout and enthusiasm are not impressive. And while it is likely that a low turnout election will hurt Republicans more than Democrats, a stay-away protest vote could also cut into the margin Democrats might have achieved.

There has been no improvement in feelings about the Democrats in this change environment; in fact positive views of the party have actually declined over the past few months, with negative assessments slightly higher than positive ones.

This is a round-about way of saying the public likes the left as much or less than they like the right. Which means the left is still the greater of two evils. As the support for the far right bottomed out over Dubai Ports, Immigration and weakness on Iraq, the left sunk just as much. The fact is the left is not going to re-emerge. The only political force will be the independents in the middle who have decided to become independent of both the far left and right. We have listened to the over the top charges and have tired of the charges – not the targets of the charges. What this means in November is anybody’s guess, but I see a wild election that pollsters will find impossible to predict.

10 responses so far

10 Responses to “Tides Turning On The Left”

  1. syn says:

    I have a good idea what is considered far right/far left yet I have no idea what moderate means.

    I’m a female 44 yrs of age who after two decades of my life were spent supporting abortion has changed my support 190 degress to the opposite position. I live in Manhattan, do not attend church yet today I am against Roe vs Wade for reasons based on secular non-religious positions. For the rest of my life I will always vote for the party which holds the position of defeating Roe vs. Wade.

    Would I be considered far right or far left?

  2. AJStrata says:


    I would call you independent, but I resist calling you anything since it is up to you to decide. I do not like the term ‘moderate’ because it implies passivity or uncaring. I am as adament in my positions as the next person.

    And for laughs, you can be non-aligned on one issue and hard partisan on another. I tend to be with you on abortion completely, though I left the pro-choice fold two decades ago.

    All I know is there are Democrats, now mostly far left liberals, and Republicans. They each represent 1/3rd of the population. The rest of us are unaligned to either party and the only growing segment in politics as people flee the parties and their intolerance of diverse ideas.

  3. smh1012 says:

    I would consider myself an “independent thinking conservative.” Does that mean that I would vote for a Democrat if I felt that they were the best choice to represent us in Washington, probably yes if they were in the mold of Joe Lieberman.

    That being said, I have not seen and do not believe I will see in the near future too many Liebermans and I personally will not waste my vote on someone from a third party who simply, while perhaps being well qualified, has no chance to be elected.

    The problem is that many have become “sheep” and do not choose to challenge those elected to actually follow through with their tasks once in power. In essence, I blame the voter as much as the politician because until an issue becomes to hot to handle, we sit in silence. Syn, I am right there with you on abortion although I have never supported Roe vs. Wade. I am not an advocate of the law and do not believe the courts have any business deciding an issue such as this rather it should be left to the individual states which in most cases would leave the decision to the electorate.

  4. Carol_Herman says:

    Affirmative Action is dead. Shelby Steele has a wonderful new book out; addressing how “opinionators” took over the core curriculum in schools. (So you could only read by “colorful” examples. While Western Civ, hard to learn, was tossed.) Today’s diplomas are pretty meaningless pieces of paper. (Where it doesn’t matter. Since if you care about reading, you can research on your own. Once you’re given reading and writing skills.) The Net does its best to encourage reading and writing. Leaving illiterates of one form or another, in the dust.

    A long time ago, and far away, Euripedes knocked women out of Greek culture to Kingdom Come. They went from being “co-equals with men,” in terms of property ownership. Government positions. And, education. To getting tossed off. His two plays that did this were Antigone. And, Medea. Painting women as emotional nuts. Not fit to sit by man’s side and rule things.

    Just in case you were wondering how long its been since wommen got to have political powers; what you’ve got now, instead, are the Conyers, Pelosi’s, even the Murtha’s. They’re not attracting anyone beyond the Kos lunatics. And, you can’t even win state elections if all you have are your sheeple. (Did you know even Louisiana may shift to the republican side come November?)

    Nobody’s got a crystal ball. But the diagnosis is in. The donks can’t convince anyone, any longer, that they have leadership skills to sit in the Majority; nor in the White House. A lot of their mischief with take a while to disperse.

    I think Ann Coulter said when the donks fail to win, and, as a party become useless to a two-party system; she thinks the republicans will split. There will be moderate candidates and conservative candidates.

    Like a Superbowl. Lots of teams have to play off, until you get to the two titans. And, they conflict with each other.

    I’d also bet that JOHN BOLTON now has a shot at the 2008 nomination. Yes, I do. I’m allowed. I wanted Cheney to emerge with the nomination; but that’s a long shot. Bolton’s not a long shot. He’s developing a reputation in foreign affairs through the UN appointment he has. And, before 2008 roles around; his 18 months will be up. Imagine the surprised donks as they get to face a titan?

  5. crosspatch says:

    Found an item in USA Today:

    Dems slipping in state races

  6. MerryJ1 says:

    According to a Rush Limbaugh segment today, Nancy Pelosi has announced that if/when the Dems take control, she (as Speaker) intends to remove Jane Harmon from Intelligence (oversight committee) and replace Harmon with Rep. Alcee Hastings.

    Never mind that Hastings was impeached and removed from the federal judiciary for bribery, perjury, and LEAKING INFORMATION about court authorized (that’s how he had the information to leak) electronic surveillance, sabotaging a large federal criminal investigation.

    His impeachment was not even close to a party-line vote, and it was in 1983 when the Democrats held congressional power.

    I agree that BOTH parties need to be cleaned of debris, but right now the GOP represents the lessor of two evils, and I’m not convinced the country can survive a substantial Democrat victory. The damage they do as a minority party is too close to lethal.

    I think short term, we have no viable option except to strenghten Republican political control, with a caveat that constituents demand some form of input into selecting House and Senate leadership members (Bob Dole wasn’t a great Senate leader, but he was the last “good” one we had; and what can you say about Speaker Hastert aside from “He WHAT???”), then concentrate on weeding out and getting rid of the corrupt and self-serving Republican debris.

    The Libertarian Party did have a shot at gaining a respectable amount of representative power, but that seemed to go down the tubes with their opposition to Afghanistan, let alone Iraq. “Live and let live” is a pretty good personal philosophy at the individual level, but it’s not very effective as a national security motto when the enemy makes it clear they won’t oblige the “let live” part.

  7. ivehadit says:

    The problem with a dem candidate is not the candidate per se as in a Lieberman. It’s the rest of the gang that will go in with the candidate that is the problem. They are incompetent, imho, and do not know how to handle power or their positions efficiently.

    The dems have become a party of special interests, mostly ones that do not function very well in this world, imho.

    We are in a very serious time in our history and will be for years, imho. It is important to have a leader that doesn’t need “on the job training” and has contacts and a network that extends around the world.

  8. ivehadit says:

    And on big thing I left out: CHARACTER and honor.

  9. MerryJ1 says:

    Agreed, Ivehadit, that’s part of what I was trying to say. There are some good, honorable, responsible Democrats (although many opt to retire), and I’d worry less about an Executive branch candidate than Legislative because a President does not have to tow the Party line.

    I do not know whether the Democrat party can be saved, but I’m certain that as is, it shouldn’t be saved.

  10. Robin2 says:

    The only political force will be the independents in the middle who have decided to become independent of both the far left and right.

    I think we are already seeing this play out in the Senate, the problem being that it gives the Democrats much more control over debate and policy decisions than they really have in looking at the population breakdown.

    That essay in HuffPo could have been written by me, though I saw the “light” a little earlier than the author. It was all about personal responsibility. Everything that Democrats stand for allows people to abdicate their personal responsibility in this world. Screw up and get pregnant with your long-term boyfriend? Get an abortion. Can’t afford health insurance? Push for government funded health care and retirement and a safety net for drug users and women who want to have kids but without a husband. Watching my sister, who has chosen a life of drug abuse and public welfare that the rest of us get to pay for was the crowning blow.

    National security followed right on the heels of this revelation. We must protect ourselves, not depend on the UN or the “goodness” of others to respect our borders and leave us alone.

    Democrats have lost people like me because they never respected those who took care of themselves.