|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Nov 19, 2010 22:15:35 GMT -8
How 21st Century Liberalism has lost much of the appeal that characterized the 20th Century variety. (19th Liberalism is something altogether different, but that's a topic for another day.) www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/45376.htmlAzWm |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Nov 20, 2010 8:37:50 GMT -8
Interesting opinion. I agree for the most part. When Liberalism and its focus changed from providing opportunity and rewards for hard work to just providing at the expense of the rest of society was where it went wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Nov 20, 2010 8:58:36 GMT -8
Interesting opinion. I agree for the most part. When Liberalism and its focus changed from providing opportunity and rewards for hard work to just providing at the expense of the rest of society was where it went wrong. Bingo. |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Nov 21, 2010 7:49:38 GMT -8
How 21st Century Liberalism has lost much of the appeal that characterized the 20th Century variety. (19th Liberalism is something altogether different, but that's a topic for another day.) www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/45376.htmlAzWm Occam's razor aplies. The simple, obvious, reason in this case is the true reason. People are frightened by the economy. As much as conservatives want to make this some kind of repudiation of liberalism (they are persistent!) most obvious reason, jobs, is the real driver of the dissatisfaction. The polls say 56% are concerned with jobs and the economy while only 4% think the deficit (and by extension reducing government) is an issue. The Republicans do not have a winner with their harping on the deficit. You would think that they would learn, but they don't. They are too hamstrung by their right wing. Trickle down died with Gonzo's buddy. Liberalism is fine, because conservatism isn't working. The polls show no permanent resurgence of conservative ideas. That kind of ideology change will not be found over the space of a couple of election cycles. |
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Nov 21, 2010 7:58:56 GMT -8
Funny thing, when Bill Clinton had his first two years in office he was a pretty stauch leftist.
The congress went along with him for the most part and they got their heads handed to them in the following election.
Barack Obama is a staunch leftist and the congress pretty much went along with him on his leftist/liberal agenda and they got their heads handed to them in the following election.
I'd say that based on the last 18 years of history Liberalism doesn't go over well with the general population. MODERATE agendas go over extremely well, but go too far to the left and the people don't like it and don't want it.
We don't know how they would react to true conservative policies since we haven't seen any since the Reagan administration...
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Nov 21, 2010 8:04:13 GMT -8
If the debate is really about how to grow the economy in real terms and to create sustainable jobs, then a big part of the equation or model must be not destroying the basic economic model by cutting into what creates activity. Don't eat the seed corn is another way of saying it. Don't devalue your currency as a way to balance your budget. Encourage thrift in your personal life, in the Federal Government, and at all places in between. Try to figure out that if something is worth doing, it can be done better the less government is involved. Liberalism violates all of those ideas and is structured to fail while appeasing people who believe in it.
|
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Nov 21, 2010 8:14:39 GMT -8
If the debate is really about how to grow the economy in real terms and to create sustainable jobs, then a big part of the equation or model must be not destroying the basic economic model by cutting into what creates activity. Don't eat the seed corn is another way of saying it. Don't devalue your currency as a way to balance your budget. Encourage thrift in your personal life, in the Federal Government, and at all places in between. Try to figure out that if something is worth doing, it can be done better the less government is involved. Liberalism violates all of those ideas and is structured to fail while appeasing people who believe in it. The way you solve the problem is to cooperate and incorporate the best of both sides into a plan. I can agree to that kind of cooperation. I would say that you are talking about thrift at the wrong time. Only 4% of the voters agree that thrift is what we should be concerned about. People want to work, yes conservatives, even the lazy ones. The budget is not their major concern. Working is. If we cooperated and addressed the budget after getting people back to work, we might have a plan. It won't happen, my friend. |
|
