PDA

View Full Version : The Electorate



Gerry Clinchy
10-03-2010, 10:38 AM
NY Times Editorial
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/02/opinion/02blow.html?th&emc=th

This is a sad commentary on the state of our electorate.



Big-city liberals and their blogging buddies love to paint Tea Partiers as yokels with incoherent candidates and language-mauling signs. (Some have even dubbed their misspellings and grammatical gaffes “Teabonics.”) On some level, this may be true. But there is also a certain hypocrisy to these taunts.

The unpleasant fact that these liberals rarely mention, and may not know, is that large swaths of the Democratic base, groups they need to vote in droves next month — blacks, Hispanics and young people — are far less civically literate than their conservative counterparts.

Therein lies the hurdle for the Democrats: How can they excite this part of the base that is not engaged and knowledgeable in an off-year election? How can they motivate these voters to help Democrats maintain their Congressional majorities when, according to a poll released this week by the Pew Research Center, 42 percent of blacks, 42 percent of Hispanics and 35 percent of voters ages 18 to 29 years old don’t even know that Democrats have a majority in the House? It’s sad. Pathetic, really. But it’s a political reality. (Only 71 percent of Democrats overall knew that Democrats had a majority in the House. By comparison, 82 percent of Republicans knew it.)

Instead of focusing like a laser on this problem, part of the White House’s new strategy appears to be to pick a fight with the left’s ivory tower intelligentsia.

Vice President Joe Biden said at a fund-raiser on Monday that the Democratic base should “stop whining (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39395081/ns/politics).” The “professional left (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/10/gibbs-talks-himself-into-another-flap/)” may be whining, but underengaged Democrats are simply wandering. And, by the way, many Democrats don’t even know who the vice president is. In the Pew poll, 64 percent of Hispanics, 51 percent of young adults and 45 percent of blacks could not name Biden as the vice president. (Only 35 percent of Republicans got it wrong.) It would seem that a lot of us were foolish to quibble over the VP candidate in 2008 ... a heartbeat away from the Presidency and many who voted for Biden don't even know his name?

In a Rolling Stone interview (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/209395?RS_show_page=1) this week, President Obama both described himself as a progressive and then laid into progressives for their “debilitating” mind-sets. Whom are you talking to, Mr. President? According to a Gallup poll released in July (http://www.gallup.com/poll/141218/americans-unsure-progressive-political-label.aspx), most Democrats didn’t even seem to know what a progressive was, and of those who did, slightly more said that it didn’t describe them than said that it did.

This high-altitude bickering is a waste of time. You can’t fight in the clouds if you want to win on the ground.

The smarter tactic is to build excitement rather than sow discord. For example, Obama has made a concerted effort recently to reach out to young people, and that appears to be paying off. According to a Gallup poll released on Friday, the Democratic advantage in the Congressional races among young voters jumped 10 percentage points from last month, producing the “widest generational gaps (http://www.gallup.com/poll/143330/Midterms-Dems-Gain-Young-Voters-Slip-Hispanics.aspx) so far this year.”

Excitement is exhilarating and contagious, even if you’re not aware of all the policies and players. Just ask those Tea Party yokels. Mr. Blow seems to conclude that all one needs to win an election is fire up the populace with some snappy slogans ... in Mr. Blow's words "sad ... Pathetic."

M&K's Retrievers
10-03-2010, 10:57 AM
"In the Pew poll, 64% of Hispanics, 51% of young adults and 45% of blacks could not name Biden as VP".

But all, I suspect, know that Palin would make a terrible VP.

Give me a break regards,

depittydawg
10-03-2010, 11:33 AM
NY Times Editorial
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/02/opinion/02blow.html?th&emc=th

This is a sad commentary on the state of our electorate.

It is also a sad commentary on the state of our elected. They are completely out of touch and calloused toward the people that elected them. In essence, they tried to pull off a Republican maneuver and are finding out the difference between their constituents. Democratic voters do not fall back in Line during an election the way Republican voters do.
As a Progressive, I can say I will never support The Current President, or Vice President in another election. That does not mean I won't support progressive candidates for congress or local elections.

Raymond Little
10-03-2010, 09:22 PM
It is also a sad commentary on the state of our elected. They are completely out of touch and calloused toward the people that elected them. In essence, they tried to pull off a Republican maneuver and are finding out the difference between their constituents. Democratic voters do not fall back in Line during an election the way Republican voters do.
As a Progressive, I can say I will never support The Current President, or Vice President in another election. That does not mean I won't support progressive candidates for congress or local elections.

Don't you mean Socialist Canidate?

Gerry Clinchy
10-03-2010, 09:53 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive

Progressivism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism), a political movement/ideology favouring reform, with origins in early 20th century America
Progressive Era (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Era), period of reform in the United States lasting from the 1890s through the 1920s
The Progressive (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Progressive), left-wing monthly magazine

depittydawg
10-03-2010, 11:15 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive

Progressivism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism), a political movement/ideology favouring reform, with origins in early 20th century America
Progressive Era (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Era), period of reform in the United States lasting from the 1890s through the 1920s
The Progressive (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Progressive), left-wing monthly magazine

What's the point Gerry?

Raymond Little
10-04-2010, 02:40 PM
What's the point Gerry?

I believe the point is, "Progressive" has replaced "Socialist" as to "ReBrand"
a Universally Failed concept worldwide.;)

Buzz
10-04-2010, 03:21 PM
What does this say about the vaunted independent that both parties work so hard at attracting?

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2010/10/02/opinion/02blowimg/02blowimg-popup.gif

Gerry Clinchy
10-04-2010, 06:42 PM
What's the point Gerry?

Lately Obama has been referring to himself as "progressive". Hillary also does.

If a progressive is someone who believes in "reform", then that term also applies to me ... the difference is in what reforms one believes are needed :-) Gay people want reforms. Tea Party advocates want reforms. Illegal immigrants want reforms. The reforms each group wants may be quite different.

I'd been hearing the term "progressive" tossed around, and really wanted to get a handle on what it was supposed to mean ... since its meaning seemed "vague" to me. Indeed, it IS vague.

My sense is that the word "progressive" is being used as a substitute for "liberal" or "left" since those two terms have acquired a negative connotation for those who do not adhere to the basic theory of redistribution of wealth. To quote Obama, "You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig."

road kill
10-04-2010, 07:06 PM
Lately Obama has been referring to himself as "progressive". Hillary also does.

If a progressive is someone who believes in "reform", then that term also applies to me ... the difference is in what reforms one believes are needed :-) Gay people want reforms. Tea Party advocates want reforms. Illegal immigrants want reforms. The reforms each group wants may be quite different.

I'd been hearing the term "progressive" tossed around, and really wanted to get a handle on what it was supposed to mean ... since its meaning seemed "vague" to me. Indeed, it IS vague.

My sense is that the word "progressive" is being used as a substitute for "liberal" or "left" since those two terms have acquired a negative connotation for those who do not adhere to the basic theory of redistribution of wealth. To quote Obama, "You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig."


Todays "progressive" is reminiscent of the 50's "Fellow Traveler."
(The English-language phrase came into vogue in the United States during the 1940s and 1950s as a pejorative term for a sympathizer of Communism or particular Communist states, who was nonetheless not a "card-carrying member" of a Communist party.)


Not much use for the "old America."
You know.......my culture.

It all must be changed.




RK

depittydawg
10-04-2010, 08:59 PM
Lately Obama has been referring to himself as "progressive". Hillary also does.

If a progressive is someone who believes in "reform", then that term also applies to me ... the difference is in what reforms one believes are needed :-) Gay people want reforms. Tea Party advocates want reforms. Illegal immigrants want reforms. The reforms each group wants may be quite different.

I'd been hearing the term "progressive" tossed around, and really wanted to get a handle on what it was supposed to mean ... since its meaning seemed "vague" to me. Indeed, it IS vague.

My sense is that the word "progressive" is being used as a substitute for "liberal" or "left" since those two terms have acquired a negative connotation for those who do not adhere to the basic theory of redistribution of wealth. To quote Obama, "You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig."

I have no problem with the label of liberal. I'll wear it proudly. As did JFK and many US leaders in the past.

Gerry Clinchy
10-04-2010, 10:04 PM
I have no problem with the label of liberal. I'll wear it proudly. As did JFK and many US leaders in the past.

I really don't like to label myself since I believe, as someone else posted earlier, that some of my views would be considered liberal, but other views would fall into the conservative category.