tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14594994.post4359795535071869737..comments2024-01-09T04:20:39.453-05:00Comments on Around the Keg: In 2008, we (hopefully) elected some real DemocratsNoahhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14345059376742159966noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14594994.post-34181902171214724172008-11-17T21:29:00.000-05:002008-11-17T21:29:00.000-05:00Smitty, I think the Republicans tried to pin the f...Smitty, I think the Republicans tried to pin the financial crisis on the Democrats, but several things happened. Most people have a poor understanding of economics and the factors that influence what happened. This, combined with a generally poor image of many Republicans, led to most people believing it was the fault of Bush and Co.<BR/><BR/>I will be interested in seeing how Obama's economic theories play out. Time has a cover with him looking like FDR and mentions the "new" New Deal. There are plenty of economists that believe the New Deal wasn't the boon that many thought and may have prolonged the Depression. Personally, I would like to see a more cautious approach to the economy.steveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08862590608695420004noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14594994.post-74795460809719141572008-11-17T19:49:00.000-05:002008-11-17T19:49:00.000-05:00(Full disclosure: I was 10 when Clinton won in 19...(Full disclosure: I was 10 when Clinton won in 1992. Everything I am about to say is through that prism...)<BR/><BR/>A Republican friend of mine said before the election that the reason Obama was going to win wasn't that the GOP was too far to the right. It was because they didn't try to hold the center with their ideals. People saw two "tax and spend" parties; one that wanted to tax and spend as a leftist, and one who wanted to tax and spend as a rightist (is that a word?). But people trust Democrats to "tax and spend"; we're better at it.<BR/><BR/>I've heard the same arguments about Clinton. He held the middle, but with traditional Republican "big government is the boogieman" style. He was able to win (he was a damn fine politician), but on Republican terms. <BR/><BR/>The country became innundated with both sides telling them that liberal is bad, and a peoples can only hear that for so long before it sinks in. Hence the current "do you consider yourself a liberal or a conservative" split.B Machttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01874975455332269325noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14594994.post-4189142470785911722008-11-17T16:32:00.000-05:002008-11-17T16:32:00.000-05:00Thanks, I can definitely follow it now!I am honest...<I>Thanks, I can definitely follow it now!</I><BR/><BR/>I am honestly relieved. I hate it when I am the only one who can follow my disjointed ideas. That said, what the hell. It’s a blog. No one is going to hand me a Pulitzer.Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12669616484991718478noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14594994.post-77931233909628091992008-11-17T16:28:00.000-05:002008-11-17T16:28:00.000-05:00"Sorry for the confusion. I appreciate the correct..."Sorry for the confusion. I appreciate the correction."<BR/><BR/>No apologies necessary! Thanks, I can definitely follow it now!Soporhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15647578353963214035noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14594994.post-44743515425314274852008-11-17T16:27:00.000-05:002008-11-17T16:27:00.000-05:00In the 1990's, the DLC was exactly what was needed...<I>In the 1990's, the DLC was exactly what was needed to get the Dems in control. </I><BR/><BR/>The thing is, the only person who got to power was Bill Clinton. The Dems lost control.<BR/><BR/>I would argue that Clinton was elected on promising to fix the economy and pushing health care reform. These were not DLC issues, they were core Democratic issues. He also had the Clinton personality, which also had nothing to do with the DLC.<BR/><BR/>After that, he Governed as a soft Republican and his messaging helped cement the Republican idea that Government is always the problem. He deregualted, gave up on health care reform and failed to create a message that Democrats in congress could get elected on. In the end, if you didn't have Bill Clinton's communications skills, you had nothing to run on and no Democratic base to support you.Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12669616484991718478noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14594994.post-81466068661909606162008-11-17T16:19:00.000-05:002008-11-17T16:19:00.000-05:00But I think the DLC was needed in the 1990's and, ...<I>But I think the DLC was needed in the 1990's and, although not liberals, the Dems were still different from Republicans!</I><BR/><BR/>I agree with that part, Andy, but I think the bigger statement is that however politically expedient the 1990s DLC was for switching control, the economic policies that came out of that era are every bit to blame, if not actually more, for our current economic crisis. For as much as I loves me some Clinton for a host of reasons, one reason I curse him is his setup of the financial system that created what we are looking at now. It created some short-term gains in wealth and prosperity. Unfortunately, it didn't last.Noahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14345059376742159966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14594994.post-90342565449734930882008-11-17T16:11:00.000-05:002008-11-17T16:11:00.000-05:00Wow...I really don't agree with that. In the 1990...Wow...I really don't agree with that. In the 1990's, the DLC was exactly what was needed to get the Dems in control. We had lost to Reagan and Bush and needed something...anything...to counter their message. <BR/><BR/>The Dems in power in Congress were splintered and the Administration was running the show. The DLC came along and was able to craft a message that people wanted to vote for. People voted on the economy, and the DLC had lots of ideas that were used and worked.<BR/><BR/>I agree that now, it is a different message. It isn't a message of moderation, it is a message of change. When the GOP took over in the 1990's, it was because people were sick of big government and Dem control in Congress (even though the Admin was really running the show). So the Dems took a bath in 1994. <BR/><BR/>People now are realizing that Republicans in control are not the party of "little government", as they turned surpluses into deficits and are spending more than the Dems could ever dream. <BR/><BR/>People see that now, and realize that they threw out the wrong bums. Oh, and Bush is no Reagan.<BR/><BR/>But I think the DLC was needed in the 1990's and, although not liberals, the Dems were still different from Republicans!Andyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13410628045985150441noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14594994.post-81400960859179470782008-11-17T15:49:00.000-05:002008-11-17T15:49:00.000-05:00But I can't quite follow the third paragraph.That'...<I>But I can't quite follow the third paragraph.</I><BR/><BR/>That's because in my pasting and editing, I completely butchered two paragraphs. Sorry for the confusion. I appreciate the correction.Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12669616484991718478noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14594994.post-29350319337540602072008-11-17T15:41:00.000-05:002008-11-17T15:41:00.000-05:00I think there are several reasons we see "new" Dem...I think there are several reasons we see "new" Democrats now, and why Democrats won so handily. Sure, the torch has been handed, thankfully, to Dean and Obama. Dems have to get off of this "I love Bill Clinton" sycophancy, and largely, they did.<BR/><BR/>In fact, were the Republicans smarter, they would have nailed the Dems on being at fault for the financial crisis, and would have had plenty of evidence to do so. But that goes to show their understanding of economics...<BR/><BR/>Anyway, one of the reasons I think we're seeing these new Dems is also because of Dean's leadership and Plouffe's flawless campaign theory. But Obama's economic theory, at least I hope, is different from Clinton's. We shall see...Noahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14345059376742159966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14594994.post-50507964789467778422008-11-17T13:50:00.000-05:002008-11-17T13:50:00.000-05:00Bob, I hate to be a pedantic POS, I try to ignore ...Bob, I hate to be a pedantic POS, I try to ignore grammar and the like in web forums because in the long run it's less important than the point.<BR/><BR/>But I can't quite follow the third paragraph.Soporhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15647578353963214035noreply@blogger.com