FRPLG
03-13-2009, 03:41 PM
Perhaps I misunderstood, I guess we're discussing a) a utopian view of how elections should be won, b) how shift leftwards in ideology is unlikely, c) hating Bush was good enough to get elected.
I'm still confused about few things though, a) how does one become popular, b) isn't reputation of the Bush Administration the rejection of their principles and policy, and c) what constitutes a shift and does losing 51 house seats, 14 senate seats, and the presidency in 4 years qualify?
a) I wish I knew that for sure. Well spoken and thoughtful goes a long way but I doubt there's a real formula. Obama had IT, hell even Bush had something that people sorta liked at one point. McCain never had it. Palin sounded scripted and vapid. Biden sounds doofey and is foot-in-the-mouth prone. Cheney comes off like Mr. Potter. Who the heck knows what IT is.
b) Perhaps so or perhaps markets(political, human, economic, take your pick) are cyclical. There are ups and downs. We've had a lot of downs lately for various reasons. The buck stops at whoever is in charge when the downs come calling. If our econmoy is in the tank come 2012 Obama will answer whether it is his fault or not.
c) something tells me that a drastic shift in political alignment, a true shift, takes decades. Bush doesn't get elected twice in eight years and then magically the whole electorate gets turned on it's principled head. It is almost guaranteed that in either the next general election or the following the Republicans will regain seats. That doesn't mean the shift right has happened. In fact it really goes more to the popularity argument. Those in power rarely get the benefit or being recognized for the positives but they sure as hell get killed over the negatives. I think a lot of people say "Hey it has sorta sucked for a while, maybe I'll vote for the other guys and see what happens." No pricniples, no real thought, just a "grass is greener" type mentality. And if those people actually got honest with themselves and really admitted to themselves what they felt about issues on a principle level they'd always vote that way. They'd always vote based on what they think the candidate will do relative to their principles.
I'm still confused about few things though, a) how does one become popular, b) isn't reputation of the Bush Administration the rejection of their principles and policy, and c) what constitutes a shift and does losing 51 house seats, 14 senate seats, and the presidency in 4 years qualify?
a) I wish I knew that for sure. Well spoken and thoughtful goes a long way but I doubt there's a real formula. Obama had IT, hell even Bush had something that people sorta liked at one point. McCain never had it. Palin sounded scripted and vapid. Biden sounds doofey and is foot-in-the-mouth prone. Cheney comes off like Mr. Potter. Who the heck knows what IT is.
b) Perhaps so or perhaps markets(political, human, economic, take your pick) are cyclical. There are ups and downs. We've had a lot of downs lately for various reasons. The buck stops at whoever is in charge when the downs come calling. If our econmoy is in the tank come 2012 Obama will answer whether it is his fault or not.
c) something tells me that a drastic shift in political alignment, a true shift, takes decades. Bush doesn't get elected twice in eight years and then magically the whole electorate gets turned on it's principled head. It is almost guaranteed that in either the next general election or the following the Republicans will regain seats. That doesn't mean the shift right has happened. In fact it really goes more to the popularity argument. Those in power rarely get the benefit or being recognized for the positives but they sure as hell get killed over the negatives. I think a lot of people say "Hey it has sorta sucked for a while, maybe I'll vote for the other guys and see what happens." No pricniples, no real thought, just a "grass is greener" type mentality. And if those people actually got honest with themselves and really admitted to themselves what they felt about issues on a principle level they'd always vote that way. They'd always vote based on what they think the candidate will do relative to their principles.