General Discussion

Bucky

(55,334 posts)

112. Not historically accurate.

Wed Dec 28, 2011, 09:23 PM

Dec 2011

Every other generation or so, America is ready for a new batch of liberalism. A hundred years ago, it was the Progressive movement. Then it was the New Deal consensus, which dominated politics from FDR to Johnson's Great Society. The backlash cameth for the Reaganaut and Neocon generations, but they're mostly played out by now. The 2010 election cycle was just the 1994 cycle popped into the microwave. They're out of ideas.

I think it's a decade or so early, history cycle-wise, but the OWS and anti-banker mood of the country could be the start of the next wave of liberalism--though it'll need to be a budget-balancing form of liberalism. Maybe Cenk Uyger's populist free enterprise message will catch on. The thing about liberal solutions is that they always come on in fresh and unexpected ways. They are the Spanish Inquisition of politics. You won't be expecting it.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

170 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Liberals cannot win a majority in this country. [View all] kentuck Dec 2011 OP

Why? Because some of us do not believe the comipinko Dec 2011 #1

I'd have to say theaocp Dec 2011 #2

Fine. Go try to elect Dennis Kucinich in Nebraska. TheWraith Dec 2011 #3

Are you suggesting... kentuck Dec 2011 #7

I love it when somebody says "Are you suggesting?" dems_rightnow Dec 2011 #81

Yeah, isn't that great? kentuck Dec 2011 #94

This is one that the left should be called out on treestar Dec 2011 #12

A totally dishonest misrepresentation... kentuck Dec 2011 #20

It doesn't matter about the majority in the country treestar Dec 2011 #26

+1000. If there's a groundswell of Progressive activism waiting to be tapped, CakeGrrl Dec 2011 #28

So you believe the majority of the country is conservative? kentuck Dec 2011 #32

Why keep going on about the majority in the country? treestar Dec 2011 #54

That may be true with the Senate but not necessarily the House or the Presidency. kentuck Dec 2011 #59

Treestar, you're on a roll. And I agree, it's time to "put up or shut up" for good! This is that.. Tarheel_Dem Dec 2011 #90

Baloney. kentuck Dec 2011 #92

If you truly believe that, why should "Democrats" have to find a better candidate? This is an..... Tarheel_Dem Dec 2011 #95

I think it is a totally false premise. kentuck Dec 2011 #97

Serious question? Does your screenname indicate that you're a "Kentuckian"? Tarheel_Dem Dec 2011 #101

oh no you didn't.... dionysus Dec 2011 #151

Do you intend just to ignore my query in post #101? I mean, I understand why you would.... Tarheel_Dem Dec 2011 #127

So progressives should be able to find someone among the nearly 2,000,000 people who live in NE Telly Savalas Dec 2011 #157

Let's see.... the least likely scenario in the nation proves your point? FredStembottom Dec 2011 #129

By golly, here's a brand new link about where such things might be possible! FredStembottom Dec 2011 #130

Never in opposition to electing more progressives. However, did you actually read the o.p.? Tarheel_Dem Dec 2011 #133

Rather than "win anywhere" the OP seemes to be talking about a simple majority... FredStembottom Dec 2011 #134

Another thought ... oldhippie Dec 2011 #142

"Maybe people lie to pollsters?" Tarheel_Dem Dec 2011 #143

You answer your own question. FredStembottom Dec 2011 #160

I "cited" the reasons "liberals" give for not breaking through. I say pish-tosh. The o.p. seems to Tarheel_Dem Dec 2011 #161

I guess what I am saying is..... FredStembottom Jan 2012 #165

Not really concerned about "how I come across to you". That, notwithstanding, I am an..... Tarheel_Dem Jan 2012 #166

Excellent! FredStembottom Jan 2012 #167

I knew we'd get there. But we certainly didn't solve the matter set out in the o.p. Tarheel_Dem Jan 2012 #170

why, them's figtin woids! BOTFUT is gonna show you who can win nebraska, but good! dionysus Dec 2011 #150

LOL. They better get to work, because I am a non-believer. Tarheel_Dem Dec 2011 #162

No, but they think they are based on what the media tells them. n/t Scuba Dec 2011 #78

Absolutely treestar Dec 2011 #55

With the assumption that the Blue Dog Democrat is better than any Republican... kentuck Dec 2011 #30

I agree, but DonCoquixote Dec 2011 #110

Since The Majority comes with things like Committee Chairmanships, and control annabanana Dec 2011 #111

Well said...nt SidDithers Dec 2011 #122

You're changing the subject. I AM fighting the Warren in Massachusetts. bluestate10 Dec 2011 #80

Repeat the Big Lie! CANDO Dec 2011 #138

Excellent post. bluestate10 Dec 2011 #75

A "flaming liberal"? kentuck Dec 2011 #82

Yeah, a Moderate. See my other posts. nt bluestate10 Dec 2011 #85

I imagine voting one's convictions is rather more important than voting for political realities LanternWaste Dec 2011 #22

for the win frylock Dec 2011 #71

because most say they want to balance the federal budget lovemydog Dec 2011 #4

And the worst is that these same Republicans in Democratic clothing JDPriestly Dec 2011 #5

What do I need to say to get elected? Ezlivin Dec 2011 #6

DNC chooses the candidates librechik Dec 2011 #8

Bingo! Wind Dancer Dec 2011 #37

Primaries decide candidates. bluestate10 Dec 2011 #83

Why do you hate Dennis so? kentuck Dec 2011 #86

Why? 99Forever Dec 2011 #9

Except most people believe in liberal policy edhopper Dec 2011 #10

That is not entirely true. MakingSense Dec 2011 #140

I said taxes on the rich. edhopper Dec 2011 #148

We all wish that was true MakingSense Dec 2011 #155

Thanks for the thoughtful response. edhopper Dec 2011 #158

You're overlooking that the elections are by state treestar Dec 2011 #11

States have voters... kentuck Dec 2011 #13

The elections are by the state treestar Dec 2011 #15

You mean like Bob Kerry? kentuck Dec 2011 #17

I don't know if the left considers him progressive enough treestar Dec 2011 #40

He was the Governor and Senator from that state already... kentuck Dec 2011 #42

HA! Charlemagne Dec 2011 #91

Liberals can't win a seat in every district etherealtruth Dec 2011 #14

My take surfdog Dec 2011 #16

Therefore.... kentuck Dec 2011 #19

Perhaps surfdog Dec 2011 #21

Therefore.... kentuck Dec 2011 #23

What I'm saying is surfdog Dec 2011 #53

Maybe? kentuck Dec 2011 #60

Relative to precisely which voting bloc? LanternWaste Dec 2011 #24

why do you keep saying that? it's a total strawman.the majority of red state voters are conservative dionysus Dec 2011 #152

So you agree? kentuck Dec 2011 #153

there are conservative areas of the country where liberal ideas can't currently win. while the GOP dionysus Dec 2011 #154

I think the "dennis kucinich types" have mostly been defined by the right-wing media... kentuck Dec 2011 #156

anyone who thinks conservatives have better ideas hasn't watched the debates spanone Dec 2011 #18

Under that reasoning, Obama must not watch such debates. AnotherMcIntosh Dec 2011 #33

That's correct sandyd921 Dec 2011 #25

That's correct kentuck Dec 2011 #27

I'm just a bit stunned that so many here sandyd921 Dec 2011 #64

I agree... n/t kentuck Dec 2011 #66

+1 mike_c Dec 2011 #70

There really is no such thing as an American conservative Major Nikon Dec 2011 #102

Why? 1. It is profitable for the DLC and its supporters. 2. Some people are nonthinking parrots. AnotherMcIntosh Dec 2011 #29

You'll have to ask our corporate media..... FrenchieCat Dec 2011 #31

You are very close to the truth, FrenchieCat... kentuck Dec 2011 #34

Most likely so.....in particular those "Moderate" Democrats you are discussing..... FrenchieCat Dec 2011 #47

"conservatism is sold hard" kentuck Dec 2011 #52

So what do we do about that? FrenchieCat Dec 2011 #72

Step One: kentuck Dec 2011 #79

"It is better to fight and lose than compromising your principles......" FrenchieCat Dec 2011 #100

^^^ This ^^^! And that's all she wrote. Tarheel_Dem Dec 2011 #118

This entire argument about Nelson is missing the point liskddksil Dec 2011 #35

It depends on the state involved. moriah Dec 2011 #36

Wasn't J William Fulbright from Arkansas? kentuck Dec 2011 #38

Fullbright was a mixed bag etherealtruth Dec 2011 #43

He was also an ardent segregationist MFrohike Dec 2011 #44

And later they gave us Bill Clinton... kentuck Dec 2011 #45

Hahaha MFrohike Dec 2011 #51

You are right to a point LiberalFighter Dec 2011 #39

Are you claiming voters don't know their own minds treestar Dec 2011 #41

actually a majority isn't enough anymore Enrique Dec 2011 #46

We could have a 99% majority and it wouldn't matter... kentuck Dec 2011 #48

Well, IMO, there is a certain logic in believing that a real progressive/liberal will probably not Zorra Dec 2011 #49

My issue MFrohike Dec 2011 #50

Well said... kentuck Dec 2011 #56

Funny thought MFrohike Dec 2011 #113

The two parties claim lovemydog Dec 2011 #57

Progressive Democrats can, though. The problem with Liberals is that ... T S Justly Dec 2011 #58

Exactly. It was Howard Dean's 50 state strategy that helped get O. elected. bbgrunt Dec 2011 #61

A Fire Breathing Populist Democrat, bvar22 Dec 2011 #62

Elizabeth Warren is from O-K-L-A-H-O-M-A! PassingFair Dec 2011 #76

That is EXACTLY right Bvar socialist_n_TN Dec 2011 #106

How many existing Senators do you think are liberal? karynnj Dec 2011 #63

we need to learn to rule with a minority like the thugs do spanone Dec 2011 #65

I believe that Progressives can win a majority. BUT I also think that politics is local. Each state jwirr Dec 2011 #67

How is it that one of the most liberal Senators, Tom Harkin.... kentuck Dec 2011 #73

I used Iowa because it used to be very rethug. Since the McGovern race some very good Democrats jwirr Dec 2011 #93

I tend to think... kentuck Dec 2011 #96

I agree with that and I think that may be the only way we replace Nelson with someone who is jwirr Dec 2011 #103

You keep repeating that, but you didn't answer my question about KY. You're represented.... Tarheel_Dem Dec 2011 #119

You're talking about molding people treestar Dec 2011 #136

Have you ever heard of Senator Frank Church? Major Hogwash Dec 2011 #131

Oh yes but those days have been gone a long time. He was good and I do remember him well. He jwirr Dec 2011 #145

Church served until 1981. It could happen again, a Democrat Senator from Idaho. Major Hogwash Dec 2011 #146

Oh don't get me wrong I completely believe we need to maintain the 50 state campaign. And I will jwirr Dec 2011 #147

Majority of Americans are liberal. Majority of the SENATE is conservative Eliminator Dec 2011 #68

Because that narrative supports the "Third Way." All the corporate money, none of the guilt. DirkGently Dec 2011 #69

For almost four decades now . . . Brigid Dec 2011 #74

yes it's exactly true. n/t. okieinpain Dec 2011 #77

I believe that its up to the voters and if they dont want a very liberal majority then it wont cstanleytech Dec 2011 #84

"Goodbye, baseball!" RUMMYisFROSTED Dec 2011 #87

Read it more closely Rummy... kentuck Dec 2011 #88

...and the ball is touched by Steve Bartman! RUMMYisFROSTED Dec 2011 #123

Liberals dont win Charlemagne Dec 2011 #89

The reason is that the conservatives have a massive, effective propaganda machine. Kablooie Dec 2011 #98

+1 kentuck Dec 2011 #99

The OWS say it is not political...... FrenchieCat Dec 2011 #105

OWS can not support candidates who are opposed to equality for some people. Bluenorthwest Dec 2011 #107

Well said, as usual. Major Hogwash Dec 2011 #109

America IS profoundly conservative. Orsino Dec 2011 #104

What Orsino said. n/t Basic LA Dec 2011 #115

SOME PARTS of America are profoundly conservative. Odin2005 Dec 2011 #116

It's more granular even than that... Orsino Dec 2011 #126

Our corporate media have told the American people that Obama is as liberal as it is possible to be Lydia Leftcoast Dec 2011 #108

Not historically accurate. Bucky Dec 2011 #112

Is that you, Rahm? Odin2005 Dec 2011 #114

When have liberals ever really had a majority in this country? Hippo_Tron Dec 2011 #117

Liberals can not win a majority.... unkachuck Dec 2011 #120

Can a liberal win Ben Nelson's seat?...nt SidDithers Dec 2011 #121

They have a better grasp on red meat messaging tavalon Dec 2011 #124

Even when Democrats have control it is hard for them to accomplish avebury Dec 2011 #125

Kucinich will never be President. MjolnirTime Dec 2011 #128

no it isn't true, we just had 60 Senate seats a couple years ago Motown_Johnny Dec 2011 #132

And that included Lieberman, Blue Dogs treestar Dec 2011 #135

agreed, but they voted for Reid Motown_Johnny Dec 2011 #144

Unfortunately, that provides an excuse for the Democrats to move further right. Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2011 #137

Money, money, money.... WCGreen Dec 2011 #139

I don't know about that. I think left-of-center describes the majority of people in this country. Tatiana Dec 2011 #141

more like "Liberals cannot win a majority in red states until you change the conservative mindset dionysus Dec 2011 #149

because party leaders have dialed more getdown Dec 2011 #159

Because working class Americans in the heartland stand in solidarity with the Wall Street bankers. Douglas Carpenter Dec 2011 #163

The audacity of the lie is especially evident during election season, woo me with science Dec 2011 #164

Because the party messaging says so. mmonk Jan 2012 #168

I for one, cheered when I heard he was leaving. JerseygirlCT Jan 2012 #169