Here are some big examples of recent attacks by Democrats on Obama:
(1) Sen. Chuck “Chuckles” Schumer came out and basically blasted the Democratic obsession with Obamacare. He noted that this was not what was concerning the public at the time and he suggested that putting their eggs in this basket made the Democrats seem out of touch. He also suggested other problems with the law and he blamed it for destroying the Democrats in the midterm elections. Chuck seems to be setting himself up as a “prominent critic” of Obamacare... the only possibly positive legacy Obama has.All of this is typical and means the Democrats are engaged in at least a low grade civil war. That’s rarely good. What makes this even worse though, is that this was isn’t about ideas, it’s about finger pointing, i.e. they all want to blame someone else for the party’s recent failures. At least in ideological battles like the GOP just fought, you have the chance to fix the things that went wrong rather than just whine that it was everyone else’s fault. Here the goal is basically just to pass the blame.
(2) Sen. “Dingy” Harry Reid is apparently on the verge of cutting a deal with Republicans to put in place $400 billion (over 10 years) in tax breaks. The White House has had no input into this and actually rallied liberals to kill the bill... after a veto threat. Think about that: a veto threat aimed at something Harry Reid is trying to pass!
(3) Sen. Robert “Illegal Fundraiser” Menendez has been working with Republicans to shape a new sanctions bill against Iran, despite Obama trying to play the “carrot only” game with Iran... and despite Obama claiming that GOP fears about Iran are paranoia.
(4) Obama wants to enact trade deals with Europe and the Pacific Rim countries to lower trade barriers. The Democrats are freaking out about this and are attacking the proposals as bad for American workers.
(5) Harry Reid’s aide David Krone has publicly blamed Team Obama for their losses in November... and aides never speak publicly without permission.
(6) Mary Landrieu attacked Obama over the Keystone Pipeline and arranged a vote to try to pass it over his objections. She fell only one vote short in the Senate. After her 12 point loss last week, she and others blamed Obama for failing to support her.
(7) Several Democrats, especially talking heads, have been positively freaking out about Obama’s immigration order. Others on the left are angered that he didn’t go any further. No one is happy and no one is staying silent.
(8) Lots of leftists and black race baiters are attacking Obama for not doing/saying more about Ferguson... or New York.
That said, there is an ideological component brewing in this fight and it’s one that is potentially highly destructive....
I wrote about the decimation of their princelings recently and in that discussion I noted that the Democrats seem to be making a mistake embracing those people in the first place. Specifically, by elevating a bunch of women, blacks, Hispanics and gays to the leadership positions to replace the boring looking/sounding white males who currently are “the face of the party,” the Democrats appear to be sacrificing their ability to pretend that they still are the party of mostly-conservative white working class males. Right now, with soft-spoken old white guys like Harry Reid (who claims to be a devoutly religious farmer who loves hunting) as the face of the party, the Democrats are able to sell the idea that they are not as urban, not as ethnic, not as anti-traditional values as they really are. But by swapping urban blacks, women, gays and Hispanics for the likes of Harry Reid, they are losing the carefully staged images they need to push this lie. In my opinion, that will cost them in rural America.
Anyways, adding to this, I am now seeing lots of articles being written by leftists who are arguing that the Democrats can no longer claim to have any real support among “working class whites,” and that they should accept this and openly embrace an agenda that better fits their new core, i.e. feminists, race baiters, gays and minorities.
I cannot tell you how much I hope they buy into this advice and change the image of their party. If they do, they will lose another 10% of the white vote, plus they will struggle with Hispanics and Asians (the fastest growing group of immigrants), who very much want the American dream... not the welfare dependency substitute.
It’s going to be fascinating to see how this plays out, particularly as all the old “moderate” Democrats fade away after being destroyed by Pelosi’s banzai charges and then Obamacare, and the face of the party becoming increasingly urban-ideological. If they also embrace a far-left urban agenda, they could well destroy themselves.
Thoughts?
21 comments:
Btw, there was a film article Friday: Monuments Men. It just came out late.
first things first. A nit, but I believe you meant to say "at the end of the present shogunate" in the 1st sentence. That said, I too hope they push the party farther left. However, Democrats, historically, seem to be better at circling the wagons when push comes to shove. If they do move left, while Hillary may have rougher sledding in the primaries, she will get the nomination if she runs. At least that is my opinion. And basically, despite her baggage, I think the far left won't stay home and not vote for her to the extent Conservatives did with Romney. I have a ticket that I kind of like right now for the R's. More of a fantasy, but still, I think it would attract a lot of voters. It would be the Walker/Carson ticket.
I suppose one argument against Walker is that his war with organzed labor in the schools might make him unpoular with the very white voters who traditionally vote for a Republican when the left wing wacko's go too far for them. These are the same people who made up the bulk of the Reagan Democrats 25 years ago. But, Walker is a governor who showed some initiative and success taking on institutional government bloat and withstood 3 straight elections. I haven't studied this in depth, but he appeals. V.P. is usually a non-factor and Carson is appealing to me as a person who could solidify support among Christians and be appealing to a certain group of minoroties. Unlike Obama, he is more of a uniter than a divider. His weakness is he is not a career politician, but we are talking about V.P.
Jed, Historically, the Dems have been much better at maintaining the image of moderation and coming together to support enough of those people to win office. This time, however, may prove to be different because the party has been losing all of its "moderates" over the last couple election cycles. And the people left seem to be sheltered leftists.
Jed, I am interested in Walker, though I don't know enough yet to know if he would be good to support or not. I can tell you that Carson would be a disaster. He has very, very, very narrow support and he's prone to saying really bad things (politically speaking).
Another nice by-product of the Demo-implosion, which actually made me smile last week when stumbling across the bit before the Daily Show interview of Dave Grohl: Jon Stewart gave the Obama admin full body-slams on his recent major campaign contributors-cum-Ambassadors, notably the former soap opera producer, and Press Secretary Earnest's mealy-mouthed responses.
Sure, Jonny-boy is far from becoming the next Dennis Miller -- and apparent forthcoming apology tonight notwithstanding, his irresponsibly reporting of law enforcement over-step re. Dante Parker, and half-ass Tweet saying the larger point still remains, proves he's still usually stuck in rewind -- but credit where it's due.
SNL's actually and finally taking swipes at the President and Democrats, too.
Jed,
If you want a black Republican, look at Tim Scott.
Eric, I saw that with Stewart. It will be interesting to see how far they let themselves go. To me, the more interesting stuff is all the articles telling the Democrats to abandon the South and to give up on whites. I really hope they accept this and run with it.
Kit, I don't know much about Scott, though I do know he has done a decent job fending efforts to marginalize him.
In Scott -- and ditto re. Mia Love -- I just see Republican whose skin colors happen to be darker than mine, Kit but you are the Crimson Tide fan. ;-)
AP, they adopt Eddie Murphy's "Kill da White People" as their theme song, I'm sorry, but I may need to consider jumping back on my old team. May.
Eric, The problem for them will be that if they go this root, then abandonment quickly turns into neglect turns in snide behavior toward turns into open hostility.
Eric,
Shut up.
Also, Crimson Tide wins games. :-)
"abandonment quickly turns into neglect turns in snide behavior toward turns into open hostility."
I can't wait.
"Shut up" is the best you can do, Kit? Sigh ...
To think I genuinely miss your presence at 3D, too.
Andrew, Excellent summary. Frankly, I don't know how Dems have for this long been able to trash rural/working class America and still gain large swathes of support from them. I know it's the message that you're a filthy racist if you don't vote D, but they've clearly taken the effectiveness of that strategy for granted and pushed it too far.
Sliding off the rails notwithstanding, I have to credit the early Tea Partiers for being the first to call shenanigans to the idea that tax breaks are racist/ sexist/ bigoted/ whatever. They may have imploded into "if that makes me a hater, then a hater I am" mentality, which only served to attract sincere haters, but at least it emboldened the Dems to quit policy and go into full-on grievance mode.
"And what do you intend to do about these unemployment figures if elected?"
"Free birth control! Reign in the cops! Cakes for gay Mexican weddings!"
"Uhh....."
Kit, That's how it usually plays out with humans. We seem to be prone to scapegoating and sour grapes, and once you identify a group as "not us," they tend to become the enemy.
Kit and Eric, I would throw in my college team except I'm not sure they play to win... or even tie.
Thanks tryanmax! I think they've gotten away with it by talking like conservatives in their home districts, even as they vote like leftists in Washington, by having permission to appear to triangulate against the liberals while at home, and by running a bunch of grumpy, old, dull white guys who are hard to see as leftists.
That's why I this change is significant. Without these guys, who are ex-soldiers, farmers, ranchers, etc. (i.e. perceived as "naturally conservative people") their ability to pretend that they are much more moderate than their activists appear will fade away.
And switching to a full grievance platform and ad strategy will be a disaster with anyone of their supporters who fall into that traditional FDR-democrat category.
""Shut up" is the best you can do, Kit? Sigh …"
You are just upset that Penn State will probably never be as good as University of Alabama. ;)
I agree the Dems will continue to bleed whites as the leadership becomes less white, but I'm not sure the infighting means anything. It's not over anything of substance so everyone is likely to fall in line (as much as they ever do) behind the 2016 nominee.
I also agree that the Dems don't seem to see liberalism as a problem, so they are unlikely to make the changes they need to win.
As for Ben Carson, he'd do for the black vote what Palin did for the white female vote: nothing. Both lack the ability to do anything beyond preaching to the choir.
Post a Comment