Saturday, November 11, 2006
What I thought about Tuesday...
...As Democrats across the country breath a collective sigh of relief, and the rubble of a nasty November campaign begins to clear, pundits from every side of the isle begin to rise up to explain what happened and why.
If you read the DailyKos you'll be lead to believe that a majority of Americans have had enough with Bush and his neo-conservative agenda, and have begun to turn to liberalism as a solution to our nation's problems. However, if you turn on the radio, you'll hear the likes of Mark Levin and Sean Hannity saying that the reason why Republicans lost is because they weren't conservative enough. These hard liners advocate that those Republicans who survived the purge return to their "Reagan principles."
thefederalist believes both the liberal blogs and the conservative radio hosts to be wrong. Tuesdays win wasn't a smashing endorsement of progressivism, nor was it a complete repudiation of conservatism. Tuesday's results were a victory for moderation.
If you ask most Americans what their political beliefs are, you won't hear many people saying "I'm a hard-core neo-con" or "I'm an extreme liberal." Most people set up political shop in the middle. These "independent" voters, like many of us, are tired of business as usual on Capital Hill. To these folks, extremism is not the answer.
Whether it is reality of perception, the Republican party led by President George W. Bush came to embody an unapologetic extremism that a majority of voters believed was leading America down the wrong path. Democrats appeared to be more moderate than their Republican counterparts for three reasons: a)they stood against the failing policy of the Bush administration b)they supported "blue dog" candidates that took conservative stances on social issues and c)they (and their leadership) are not as well known as those Republicans who are tied to President Bush.
Liberal Democrats should pay close attention to the second reason. While they were able to knock off "moderate Republicans" such as Nancy Johnson, Democrats owe their newfound majority in the House, and especially in the Senate, to blue dog Democrats. These moderately conservative, moderately progressive candidates were the ones who carried the day in places like Virginia, Montana, and who were able to win a majority of governorships and state legislatures.
No, extreme liberalism is not on the rise, and you haven't heard the last of conservatism either. Whichever political party is able to call the middle of the spectrum as their home will not only hold the most victory celebrations come November, but will be the most able group to move America forward.
...As Democrats across the country breath a collective sigh of relief, and the rubble of a nasty November campaign begins to clear, pundits from every side of the isle begin to rise up to explain what happened and why.
If you read the DailyKos you'll be lead to believe that a majority of Americans have had enough with Bush and his neo-conservative agenda, and have begun to turn to liberalism as a solution to our nation's problems. However, if you turn on the radio, you'll hear the likes of Mark Levin and Sean Hannity saying that the reason why Republicans lost is because they weren't conservative enough. These hard liners advocate that those Republicans who survived the purge return to their "Reagan principles."
thefederalist believes both the liberal blogs and the conservative radio hosts to be wrong. Tuesdays win wasn't a smashing endorsement of progressivism, nor was it a complete repudiation of conservatism. Tuesday's results were a victory for moderation.
If you ask most Americans what their political beliefs are, you won't hear many people saying "I'm a hard-core neo-con" or "I'm an extreme liberal." Most people set up political shop in the middle. These "independent" voters, like many of us, are tired of business as usual on Capital Hill. To these folks, extremism is not the answer.
Whether it is reality of perception, the Republican party led by President George W. Bush came to embody an unapologetic extremism that a majority of voters believed was leading America down the wrong path. Democrats appeared to be more moderate than their Republican counterparts for three reasons: a)they stood against the failing policy of the Bush administration b)they supported "blue dog" candidates that took conservative stances on social issues and c)they (and their leadership) are not as well known as those Republicans who are tied to President Bush.
Liberal Democrats should pay close attention to the second reason. While they were able to knock off "moderate Republicans" such as Nancy Johnson, Democrats owe their newfound majority in the House, and especially in the Senate, to blue dog Democrats. These moderately conservative, moderately progressive candidates were the ones who carried the day in places like Virginia, Montana, and who were able to win a majority of governorships and state legislatures.
No, extreme liberalism is not on the rise, and you haven't heard the last of conservatism either. Whichever political party is able to call the middle of the spectrum as their home will not only hold the most victory celebrations come November, but will be the most able group to move America forward.
Comments:
<< Home
POST 53 is having an Art Show this weekend.
Cost is $5.00
What a great way to show support --see local artists' works and see some other people from Darien.
What an easy way to help out an organization that is there for you night and day.
Post a Comment
Cost is $5.00
What a great way to show support --see local artists' works and see some other people from Darien.
What an easy way to help out an organization that is there for you night and day.
<< Home
