April 4, 2005
CHOOSING KINNOCK OVER BLAIR:
Principled Realism: Good for Both Parties (Paul Johnson, 04.18.05, Forbes)
I watch with interest the efforts of American liberals to absorb and learn from the reelection of George W. Bush and from the strength of the GOP's grip on Congress. To me this recalls vividly the revolution that occurred in Britain's Labour Party when Margaret Thatcher swept the board in 1979 and won three elections in a row.Labour's response was to abandon socialism completely, accept Thatcher's privatization of nationalized industries and reform of the trade unions and celebrate these changes by renaming itself "New Labour." As a result of its humility and willingness to learn, Labour has now won two elections handsomely and, in the opinion of most observers (though not in mine), is set to win a third. That is how democracy works--a major shift in policies that wins the support of the voters persuades the opposition that it must change its program fundamentally if it is to garner votes and remain in the game.
Is the Democratic party going to react in the same way?
Considering they made Howard Dean the head of the DNC, the DLC practically folded up shop, and they've staked their party on stopping SS reform, it would appear that they're headed in exactly the opposite direction. Posted by Orrin Judd at April 4, 2005 5:31 PM
The Democrats haven't hit bottom yet. They controlled the Senate until 2002. They have gained Governorships and have finally changed some formerly Red states to Blue such as New Hampshire. They won the 2000 presidential election in popular votes with a candidate more liberal than Howard Dean.
The Republican who was elected in 2000 has picked two of their favorite issues education (public schools at least) and government subsidized medicine and been more than willing to spend money like a drunken sailor on those programs. He also has stated that he is more than willing to sign gun control legislation. Apparently he also is willing to cheer on the massive illegal immigration of Mexicans, the result of which will be the ballooning up of a major Democratic constituency.
So they aren't in that bad of shape.
Posted by: h-man at April 4, 2005 5:58 PMh:
They controlled the Senate for about 17.5 months between January 1995 and January 2003, during which time they passed nothing except McCain-Feingold (foul as it is).
Posted by: jim hamlen at April 5, 2005 12:53 AMI think they need to beaten some more and that Generation of "leaders" will have to die off.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at April 5, 2005 1:16 AMand have finally changed some formerly Red states to Blue such as New Hampshire.
Possible vote fraud.
Posted by: Sandy P at April 5, 2005 1:21 AMThe Democrats are far from hitting bottom.
The combination of sheer ineptitude and grotesque criminality of the GOP on the local level has given them a new lease on life in places as diverse as NJ, Arizona, Colorado, Illinois and Montana. The NY GOP is dead. The craven behavior of the GOP Congress, reminiscent of the worst days of Roscoe Conkling, has given me pause to wonder if the Dems can't pull the midterms out, giving the Hildebeest a flying start for 2008. The Quisling-like actions and statements of such as Sen. Hagel(R-Saudi Arabia) Sen. Chafee(R-Association of Retarded Citizens), and Sen. Domenici(R-K Street) are nothing short of disgusting.
Posted by: bart at April 5, 2005 7:03 AM