very well thought out. I agree, and for that matter the 06 elections also agree. People are more likely to vote leaning conservative than they will leaning liberal. Thats one reason the Dems did great in 06 and are setting themselves up for solidifying their numbers in 08 – they had Conservative Democrats who ran. Battling the far right with the far left doesn’t work (Kerry anyone) but battling the far right with central does work. – or at least Central appearing (Clinton, etc).

An afternoon reading through Kos anytime around the election, or the confirmation hearings for the two Supreme Court justices shows lots of Kos postings with references to Bush = Hitler, Bush = criminal, and more than one or two comments to the effect that the poster would like to see members of the administration killed. Calls for impeachment are almost a daily appearance. This is not what I call mainstream, rational political conversation. Which is why I place it in the same category as LGF. Both offer a very one-sided view, and a lot of vituperation, bile, spleen, and vitriol, and the occasional logical comment. Opinions vary, of course, but I have found both Kos and LGF to be long on polemic, and short on reasoned discourse.

Thanks.

I won’t try to speak for the LGF side of this equation, but I think you’re mostly mischaracterizing “the Daily Kos crowd.”

I’d say the prevailing viewpoint on blogs like Kos is that the GOP is almost entirely unrepresentative of the interests of common people and the Dems fall short insofar as they’ve attempted to emulate the GOP’s corporatist tendencies. You might be of the opinion that that’s tantamount to leftwing craziness, but I see opinions like that as willful suppression of sensible and in some cases even obvious distinctions.

That opinion I see as similar to commonly expressed opinions in ‘02 and ‘03 that opposition to the Iraq War is tantamount to appeasement of terrorists or to nihilist Marximism or some such.

Do you see all stands on principle as being extremist posturing? I think it’s fair to say that sometimes happens, but not that the occasions where it happens justify a characterization of all who claim to be standing on principle as extremist posturers.

Sometimes you have to make an effort to understand what people are saying instead of immediately consigning them to somewhere on the fringe because something about them is distasteful. Admittedly not always easy, but I think it’s important that we try harder to actually understand.

I will be severely depressed if I have to support Hillary. In 12 years, can’t the Dems find someone to run who ANYONE really likes? For that alone, I’ll probably take Obama, even though his name alone almost ensures a loss from an electorate barely informed by a shallow media.

The Democratic party has been suffering from this problem since 1968, when the left-wing crazies stormed the smoke filled rooms of the palace, and changed the practices, ensuring that the most extreme views got more consideration in setting party strategies. Unfortunately, the Republicans followed a similar course, with the right wing crazies taking over after 1974. You see, this really is back to the sixties and seventies – the Daily Kos crowd is trying to re-live the salid days of Berkeley Free Speech and ‘Hell No! We Won’t Go!’ while the Little Green Footballs team is trying to return to their own vision of the past, a strong presidency that took no crap from the left, i.e. the Nixon white house circa 1970. Neither vision is particularly productive.

The country votged for change last year, but not the kind of change the base of either party wants. There is not a mandate for massive congressional investigations and impeachment of the president. Speaker Pelosi seems to understand this, even if the Kos Krowd does not. Likewise, the right wing Republican base may want to move to the far right socially, but the country isn’t supporting that, either.

I have said it before, most Americans seem to want a centrist policy which is more socially liberal than the most extreme of the Christian right, but much more conservative than the secular left. They want a foreign policy which is more nuanced than either the America First! views of the far right, or the One World Brotherhood of the far left, a policy with a strong defense and protection of our interests, but without being the world’s policeman. The desired domestic policy is probably not goting to please the fringes either: A balanced budget, rational policies on social spending, and recognition that we cannot solve all the problems people have for them.

In simplistic terms, my perception of what the moderate majority wants out of government is not exciting enough for the media, who thrive on controversey. But just as the Republicans made the mistake of getting sloppy, and corrupt, and promoting narrow self-interest, the Democrats are equally capable of making the same mistakes. The question is: How fast will they follow the same old path that led to the voters tossing the Republicans out? It is, I believe, only a matter of time. Lord Acton was correct when he observed that, “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

I just had my thought for the day–what if McCain gets Lieberman to run as Veep?

Wait a second… Would he be doing that to pull in Democratic voters, or Republican ones?

Maybe he thinks family members, and esp. daughters, are “fair game” in politics – he liked to make cruel jokes about Chelsea Clinton – but that’s just more evidence of a lack of basic character.

Yeah, we’re on our 2nd already.

“”Kevin, I think you’re exactly right. McCain (and Guiliani) can’t pass the primaries, and rightly so, because the GOP can’t win without its social conservative base”"

Dem’s couldn’t win in 06 without some pretty conservative candidates.

Thanks, Kim! Great and unfortunately true statement. I used to think he might be worth the vote despite some major differences. Not anymore.