DUers sometimes need to be reminded that the present is not the past and is not the future

[theboss]

I feel like so many posters here became exposed to politics in either '98 or '00 and therefore feel like this culture of getting 51 percent of the vote by all means has always been the case.

Just some reminders.

1. The electoral map is not solidified.

Some of you may have heard of the Solid South. Once upon a time, Republicans dare not run for office in the south. It was a ridiculous notion. Granted, the 1964 Civil Rights Act changed a lot of that, but as late as 1976, Democrats could still sweep the Southern States. The South did not become a solid Republican bloc until the 1980s.

Likewise, the state of California was once a fairly consistent win for Republicans. It wasn't until Pete Wilson that California completely flipped into the Dems column.

Things can change fairly quickly.

2. Washington was not always so poisonous and partisan.

The real force behind the Reagan Revolution was none other than liberal icon Tip O'Neil. Carter's worst enemies in Washington were not Republicans but liberal icons Tip O'Neil and Ted Kennedy.

The real moment, I think, that compromise became a bad word was the 1990 tax increases. That happened because Bush 41 agreed to work with Foley, Mitchell, and Rostenkowski. And his party punished him for it. The only president to really buck his party since then was Clinton regarding NAFTA.

But I get the sense that not only is the public exhausted by these Dick Morris/Karl Rove games, the politicians are as well. We may very well be seein a reprieve on the horizon.

3. McCain-Clinton or McCain-Obama has the potential to be more than civil

McCain for all his faults is an honorable politician except in rare instances were he truly despises an opponent. And the only candidate in '08 that he despised was Romney. I don't think that it is in his nature to run a scorched earth campaign against either Clinton or Obama.

The Clintons are always capable of getting ugly as we have seen, but I think they both genuinely like McCain - probably more than they like Obama.

And Obama most likely won't go negative unless his hand his forced. And even then, he tends to go relatively easy.

So...my advice...don't fall into the trap of thinking that the Dick Morrises and Karl Roves always dictated behavior. It's simply not the case.

[theboss]

1. Nothin'

Oh well.

[hfojvt]

2. four recs, I am not sure I would complain

However, McCain does not necessarily control the campaign. Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter, and Maureen Dowd are absolutely guaranteed to "go negative". So is Tweety against Clinton, and many in the press corps seem to follow his lead. Now with McCain-Obama, I am not sure. I know Tweety first endorsed Giuliani, and then he fell in love with Uncle Fred. He might also have a crush on the war hero McCain, but I think he's been vocally against the war for a few years now.

[donheld]

3. You have a lot of really good information here

People should read this.

[loyalsister]

4. Great post

I can understand why the possibility of a paradigm shift is unimaginable, but I really do believe more people are ready than some here might expect.

The thesis that we may have more in common than top down leaders have tried to force us to believe is difficult to entertain when politics and political tactics can be so personally offensive.

Republicans have been duped into believing that there cannot possibly be a decent Democrat who shares their everyday problems, and vise versa. But, we are all paying for this war. We are all paying for the problem we are having with our health care system and we are all at risk in it. Everyone is affected by the economic downturn. Most people don't make enough money that it is no small thing.

That is why Obama is leading, and that is why his coat tails are strong.

[Usrename]

5. I think nothing was so poisonous as the Gingrich Doctrine.

When Newt Gingrich rose to power in the House, he did it on a scorched earth policy that had for its fundamental tennet:

POWER UNUSED IS POWER ABUSED.

He taught the doctrine that representatives were sent to Washington to exercise power for their constituents.

It didn't matter so much exactly what was or wasn't accomplished by the exercise of this power, just that it had to be used.

Unity and lock-step was the only method that was tolerated, supposedly to MAXIMIZE the power that these guys had. It didn't matter where they were marching, just as long as they all stuck together. This doctrine outlived him in the House and Senate for years and years after he was gone. Only the humbling defeat in the mid-terms and the prospects of another even worse defeat has put a small chink in this strategy. What I call it the Gingrich Doctrine is basically just mob tactics.