Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think this is the most insightful post I've seen in a while. I'm fiscally conservative, socially, NOT a religious zealot. I actually thought the blue dog dems had the potential to salvage this country, and provide a fiscally conservative middle ground between the extremists on both the left and right. Unfortunately, the extreme leftward slant of the democratic leadership soured most moderate/independant voters. This cost the "blue dogs" the positions in the middle, left the hard left in traditional blue strongholds, and ushered in a number of "far right" pols everywhere nearly everywhere else.
As so many others have said, have politicians on both sides of the isle actually learned anything in the last 2 years? Or last 10 years for that matter?
Much as I dislike much of what Obama has tried to do policy wise, I do feel kinda sorry for him now. Trying to get much accomplished in the next 2 years is going to be tough. Had he been more willing to compromise and LISTEN to the people of this country he might well not be in this position, so my pity is pretty tempered.
We are now at that place where the rubber meets the road and we will see just how important or dispensable the middle really was as a temper to each parties more ideological bases. Honestly, I think Obama is going to be forced to leave his more left leaning base, as it has been seen (despite criticism from the right) that the left has pointed out on numerous occasions he has already been to compromising to the right. If he is sincere about working on behalf of those American's most crunched right now, he is going to have to work with the right and further alienate the left. If things do improve, the left might be more forgiving, if things do not improve the left is going to dump him and already talks of running against him in the primaries has began. He is certainly in a really tight spot, no doubt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547
My take? I think we're going to "you know where" in a hand-basket. I think you're right, and I think who wins in 2012 will depend on who puts the most blame on the other side. If the Dem's don't get their act together on the economy, and communicate their plan clearly to the American people, they'll be out. If the R's are constantly trying to obstruct efforts to improve the economy, or if they go after cuts to popular entitlements, it'll swing the other way. My bet is that it's going to get very ugly--the R's will go after their 100 subpoenas against the admin to try to distract their base from the fact that they aren't going to be able to follow through on their campaign promises. It's a scary time for all of us--I honestly don't know if people marching in the streets can change things or not.
Wars are seldom pretty, thats for sure, but at least in our national basket we'll all be cozy together.
I can appreciate the sentiment of those Tea Party people who are pretty sick and tired of Washington's establishment and the status quo. I personally feel that government does need to focus on issues of the middle and lower classes as well as our national health in general, be it health care, be it roads, rails, and waterways, pipelines and wires and bridges. We have been abroad in wars rebuilding nations we just destroyed while America falls apart and we just can't go on like this.
The dark side of this coin is that with the Tea Party or any populist insurgency, we will end up with people getting elected who know little to nothing of statecraft and the art of governing. Is this any better or worse than those who know how but don't? Your guess is as good as mine. Right now this country is in a really bad place and that seems to be the main choice, continue with an establishment that is so far distanced from middle Americas problems or elect a lot of known-nothings who are going to have to learn as they go amid one of the worst economic times in our nations history.
So, lets all get cozy in that basket together I guess, if were going to hell, might as well share the ride.
Leaving people like me (who really are moderates) wondering where the heck they fit....
Here's the piece I think some of you are missing. I really do believe that the tea party started as a grassroots movement, and the "little guys" still believe that's what it is, but you have to follow the money to see where it stands now in terms of who really has the power. The candidates won their primaries on sheer energy and a desire to change government, but they won the generals largely because of a huge infusion of RNC and corporate cash. Bushies still had the "big spender republican" label this election cycle, so they lost their primaries. The R party, in turn, held its nose and helped elect tea party candidates to get a majority. The R leadership is in a position now where they can throw out all kinds of policy proposals to appease that base, knowing they'll never get past the Senate and the Prez--they can blame the Dems for not passing stuff that they don't want either. They've done this to the social conservatives since the Reagan years--remember all the rants about everything from patriotism to "freedom fries" to keep people's attention diverted from what was really going on with policy? By the time 2012 hits, they'll be free to run as regular old R's again--if the TP doesn't tow the R line, they'll be out the door. It's all about power, and whoever has the biggest checkbook usually (but not always) wins the election. I'm betting the R's are not happy about dumping lots of money into campaigns for people like Sharon Angle or Christine O'Donnell who were TP favorites--they want more electable candidates next time, and they'll get them. They're already trying to head Sarah Palin off at the pass--your TP candidates are going to be left sitting on the sidelines. You'll have two choices--meld with the nonconservative Republicans, or go your own way to a third party, making you unelectable, but election spoilers for the R's.
Here's the problem the Republican Party has; the so-called "Base" has swallowed the Tea Party medicine and that's what drove voter turnout for the Republican Party this election cycle. The Republican base passed over so-called mainstream Republicans in favor of Tea Party candidates.
The question in 2012 is what is the economic and political climate going to be? If unemployment is below 8% and the economy looks like it's improving what's going to be the national perception of who deserves the political credit? How successful are the Tea Party members in Congress going to be in advancing their agenda? If Congress going to turn into a three ring circus where a lot gets said but nothing of any importance gets done then that drives a new wave of voter frustration. Remember the political climate in 2008 was completely different than it was in 2010. The political climate in 2012 is going to be different than what we have today.
One question that remains to be seen how it will play out. Tea Party supporters (and I include myself here) have promoted the party as focusing on fiscal conservatism, and a constitutionally limited government. They have tried to distance themselves from the Religious Right wing of the R party in many cases. Yet the most well known leaders (and yes, leadership of a non-centeralized movement is an oxymoron) are far-right social conservitives.
The question is will the tea party congressmen keep their focus on fiscal issues, or will they bow to the religious right on social issues, especially abortion? If they do, IMO they loose all credability and are just another spin on the religious wing of the R party.
Here's the problem the Republican Party has; the so-called "Base" has swallowed the Tea Party medicine and that's what drove voter turnout for the Republican Party this election cycle. The Republican base passed over so-called mainstream Republicans in favor of Tea Party candidates.
They need the social conservatives, but in the eyes of the R party, they were harmless--they've done the patriotism/religion thing with that group for years, but never backed it up with policy. I think the difference this year is that the TP is actually making policy demands and challenging the established R leadership. Honestly--it will not be tolerated. The big R's got the tea party elected in the generals, and they can take them out just as easily--they control the checkbook. They used them for this election, but now that they've got some numbers back and they've been able to distance themselves from the Bushies, I think the tea party will be gone.
The problem is the Tea Party drove voter turnout NOT the Big R's. For better or worst the Tea Party and the Big R's are mated at the hip. The Tea Party needs the Big R's money and political strategy expertise. The Big R's need the Tea Party's ability to fire up the base. In the foreseeable future one really doesn't work without the other. Unless a different set of political dynamics appears Remember a lot of formerly Democratic or swing states swung Republican this election cycle i.e. Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania. If you change the political dynamics these states swing back to the Democratic side. The only way the Republicans have a legitimate shot at winning the presidency in 2012 is to keep these states on their side.
One question that remains to be seen how it will play out. Tea Party supporters (and I include myself here) have promoted the party as focusing on fiscal conservatism, and a constitutionally limited government. They have tried to distance themselves from the Religious Right wing of the R party in many cases. Yet the most well known leaders (and yes, leadership of a non-centeralized movement is an oxymoron) are far-right social conservitives.
The question is will the tea party congressmen keep their focus on fiscal issues, or will they bow to the religious right on social issues, especially abortion? If they do, IMO they loose all credability and are just another spin on the religious wing of the R party.
I was proudly among those who chided the Bush administration for its fiscal irresponsibility and still have my Paul sign hanging as a reminder of a moment in time when the Tea Party-Campaign for Liberty focused on fiscal issues. Included in these issues were the relation of our massive presence abroad in places like Europe, Korea, the Middle East, etc... This is one issue that the contemporary right and left just refuse to address, that the cost of empire is a huge burden upon our economy. Folks are welcome to argue whether it is necessary or not, but for the most part, people refuse to even consider it, let alone argue over it.
On one hand, you are going to see fiscal issues take precedence over social issues in the immediate future, but lets not kid ourselves either, the social conservatives make up a large voting bloc and the right has to pay some lip service to to them, lest they feel slighted and go rogue.
The reality is the Republican base didn't choose Mike Castle in Delaware it chose Christine O'Donnell. The Republican base didn't choose Sue Lowden in Nevada, it chose Sharron Angle. The Republican base didn't choose Lisa Murkowski it chose Joe Miller. These were all experienced Republican politicians that lost to Tea Party upstarts.
In primaries the partisan base has much more influence than the political establishment. Right now the Tea Party in this country is in control of the Republican Party base in many states of this country.
Scott Brown is on the list--I thought he was their hero? As I said--I'm getting out my popcorn because this is going to get interesting. Will big business keep funding tea party campaigns if they try to take out the big business republican leadership? Will the tea party break from the R's and create a third party? How are they going to come up with any type of cohesive economic policy and govern if they're out to stab each other in the back? Stay tuned...
My personal opinion? I think there's going to be a steady push to move the tea party toward more social conservative issues--the libertarian faction is going to get left out in the cold, and the TP base can't do much damage to the R agenda that way. I think the R's are going to be prepared for the primaries in 2012 with vetted candidates and the money to back them up--no more Sharon Angles and Christine O'Donnells. Remember--a straight R candidate had a tough time this year because of the Bush legacy--that's officially gone now. The R's have reinvented themselves through the tea party name. The state R organizations will have electable candidates in place that can talk the tea party talk to the base, but who ultimately support R policies and leadership. I'm a moderate conservative, but I'm far from a tea partier--I support smaller government, but not the extremes the TP wants to take it to. I still think this whole thing is sad--they're using people who at heart just want the country to be better. I think the only way we'll ever break the party monopolies is through comprehensive campaign finance reform--like public funding--that takes the power away from the brokers in the parties and makes the playing field level. We seem to have sunk to the lowest possible level in this county--until people rise up and demand that special interests get out of campaigns, nothings going to change. The Dem's and R's run the show, like it or not.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think you're right, and I think who wins in 2012 will depend on who puts the most blame on the other side. If the Dem's don't get their act together on the economy, and communicate their plan clearly to the American people, they'll be out. If the R's are constantly trying to obstruct efforts to improve the economy, or if they go after cuts to popular entitlements, it'll swing the other way. My bet is that it's going to get very ugly--the R's will go after their 100 subpoenas against the admin to try to distract their base from the fact that they aren't going to be able to follow through on their campaign promises. It's a scary time for all of us--I honestly don't know if people marching in the streets can change things or not.
