I don't know whose idea it was, but someone decided that the Democrats would take the toss-up election of 2000 and rile up the base. So all the liberal Subaru Outbacks carried Re-Select Bush bumber-stickers right through the 2004 election. Har-de-har-har.
You can see the results at Gallup. In summer 2004 Democratic voter enthusiasm was at 68 percent, in summer 2008 it was at 61 percent, while Republican enthusiasm was at 51 percent and 35 percent.
Today things are different. In summer 2012 Democratic enthusiasm is at 39 percent and Republican enthusiasm is at 51 percent.
In my view the Democratic decision to crank up partisan rage back in the early Bush years has proved to be a strategic error. Of course, I felt back in 2001 that the decision to insist that the 2000 election was stolen was an act of meanness. After all, when the Democrats obviously stole the 1960 election in Illinois and Texas Richard Nixon took it like a man, because he didn't want to divide the country (and who knows, maybe he thought it wouldn't help him).
The partisan mobilization turned out to be an error because Democrats taught their followers to believe that a win in 2008 would "fundamentally transform" America. Now that the Obama administration clearly hasn't transformed anything except the national debt, what will the partisans do? Where will they go?
They will get demoralized. Meanwhile, the rest of America is getting enthused about getting to the polls.
There is a good reason why the Obama win has turned to ashes. It didn't come up with anything to deal with our underlying economic and social problems. Liberal partisans suffer under the delusion that their agenda is something fresh and new. It isn't. It is just big government wanting to simplify and organize and control the people. As governments have tried to do right down the ages.
The magic of social animals, from ants to zebras, is that we do the right thing instinctively, without being told. The magic of all living things is that they are adaptable. They respond to changing conditions by changing their ways.
The problem about big government is that it is designed to treat humans like machines. The problem with big government is that when conditions change it does not change. The same is true, to a lesser extent, with big business.
The problem for Americans is how to reform big government into adapting to the future before it drives us all off the cliff.
That is why the Democrats ads featuring Paul Ryan pushing grannie over a cliff are such a joke. We want to be nice to grannies--and to grandpas like me--but only up to a point. First we have to make sure that the average working stiff doesn't go over a cliff, not to mention the average mom, and the average student, and the whole economy.
That, presumably is what President Obama means when he says that "I believe that the way you grow the economy is from the middle out. I believe in fighting for the middle class because if they’re prospering all of us will prosper."
The only problem is that the notion of growing the economy "from the middle out" is utterly fatuous. It means, of course, that the president will take money from the rich via the Buffett Rule and give it to the middle class. The only problem is that redistribution doesn't grow the economy. Never did, never will.
The only problem is that Democrats just don't get it. And now they are losing the big head of steam they worked up in the Oughties when the evil Bush was president.
You can see the results at Gallup. In summer 2004 Democratic voter enthusiasm was at 68 percent, in summer 2008 it was at 61 percent, while Republican enthusiasm was at 51 percent and 35 percent.
Today things are different. In summer 2012 Democratic enthusiasm is at 39 percent and Republican enthusiasm is at 51 percent.
In my view the Democratic decision to crank up partisan rage back in the early Bush years has proved to be a strategic error. Of course, I felt back in 2001 that the decision to insist that the 2000 election was stolen was an act of meanness. After all, when the Democrats obviously stole the 1960 election in Illinois and Texas Richard Nixon took it like a man, because he didn't want to divide the country (and who knows, maybe he thought it wouldn't help him).
The partisan mobilization turned out to be an error because Democrats taught their followers to believe that a win in 2008 would "fundamentally transform" America. Now that the Obama administration clearly hasn't transformed anything except the national debt, what will the partisans do? Where will they go?
They will get demoralized. Meanwhile, the rest of America is getting enthused about getting to the polls.
There is a good reason why the Obama win has turned to ashes. It didn't come up with anything to deal with our underlying economic and social problems. Liberal partisans suffer under the delusion that their agenda is something fresh and new. It isn't. It is just big government wanting to simplify and organize and control the people. As governments have tried to do right down the ages.
The magic of social animals, from ants to zebras, is that we do the right thing instinctively, without being told. The magic of all living things is that they are adaptable. They respond to changing conditions by changing their ways.
The problem about big government is that it is designed to treat humans like machines. The problem with big government is that when conditions change it does not change. The same is true, to a lesser extent, with big business.
The problem for Americans is how to reform big government into adapting to the future before it drives us all off the cliff.
That is why the Democrats ads featuring Paul Ryan pushing grannie over a cliff are such a joke. We want to be nice to grannies--and to grandpas like me--but only up to a point. First we have to make sure that the average working stiff doesn't go over a cliff, not to mention the average mom, and the average student, and the whole economy.
That, presumably is what President Obama means when he says that "I believe that the way you grow the economy is from the middle out. I believe in fighting for the middle class because if they’re prospering all of us will prosper."
The only problem is that the notion of growing the economy "from the middle out" is utterly fatuous. It means, of course, that the president will take money from the rich via the Buffett Rule and give it to the middle class. The only problem is that redistribution doesn't grow the economy. Never did, never will.
The only problem is that Democrats just don't get it. And now they are losing the big head of steam they worked up in the Oughties when the evil Bush was president.
No comments:
Post a Comment