Primarily it helps that the far left isn’t building a foundation of willful ignorance and the rejection of experts and science.
I believe that if the majority of studies came out and said that Medicare for all would raise costs and require extremely high increases in taxes, that people would abandon those plans.
But they kind of did… But perhaps not because they were “too far right”.
(This may be what you are saying, it’s hard to partake exactly whenever you are saying “the tea party didn’t kill them” or “they didn’t do it by being too far right”)
The problem with the tea party, is that they were zealots. They were irrational. They refused to compromise. They were hyper partisan.
The GOP exploited this to get out the vote, and take control. But in doing so, they became inextricably linked to that zealotry… To that hyper partisanship.
And the result of that, is that even after they held control of Congress and the presidency, they still couldn’t do things. They failed to govern, because they were driven by irrational ideology instead of pragmatic operational goals.
It wasn’t their being “conservatives” that killed them. It was that they were irrational zealots.
And irrational zealots are not who you want to court, even if they seem like an easy Mark to get votes from.
I think the last time the Democrats were in charge of all three branches of government we got…gasp… affordable health insurance! Oh the humanity!
Mostly true, but there are a lot of people on the left willing to ignore evidence if it supports their guy/gal/position. It’s just human nature to an extent.
Not nearly to the point of the GOP, but remember they didn’t start out that way either. It’s a slow process for the most part.
I do worry a little bit about the Occupy Wall Street-ers and hard-core Bernie Bros who really are just in it to tear down the whole thing and start over.
If they sense an empowered Progressive Left movement, they’ll jump on and try to hijack it to their own ends.
I’m also struggling with the comparison. The far right offers racism, dictatorship, xenophobia and jackboots. Can we understand what the nightmarish far left offers? Is it communism? Erasing the equality gap, fighting climate change, and equal rights for all?
Don’t forget the grave-shitting.
I think the chief distinction here is that conservatism is an authoritarian ideology — or at least conservatives seem to all ultimately be pro-authoritarian — while liberalism is not an authoritarian ideology.
This is not to say that leftist states can’t become authoritarian. Anything can go wrong, and often does. That said, all of the failed ‘leftist’ states I can think of (USSR, China, Vietnam, NK, etc) were authoritarian regimes from the very start, not liberal regimes that went wrong.
And the Democrats need votes… soooo…
Like Timex alluded to, it’s the exact trap the GOP fell into. Remember their party was DOA with the electorate after W fucked up everything. People were debating how many decades it would be before the GOP found it’s bearings again. Then the Tea Party showed up and offered a bunch of free votes for the taking.
This is not a large group, nor is it unified, and there is no reason to believe they’re somehow in power. They have a voice, it’s a small on if that. When’s the last time occupy Wall Street was even discussed? Some ideas came out of there, sure but it’s not a giant movement or a pound the table group until they get attention. they dispersed.
Exactly. Yeah it’s not even remotely a good comparison.
French Revolution? Venezuela? I mean there are plenty of examples of where it can lead.
Potentially, after all we “never really tried it” and all.
Ideally this would be the outcome, but ideals tend to disappear once people start getting power.
I’ve always believed more in the Horseshoe Theory. The farther you get from center, the less the details of why you need to establish an authoritarian regime and suppress dissidents matters. You’re just going to do those things. Whether that’s in the name of “the workers” or “the master race” is mostly irrelevant.
We might see increased taxes (mostly on the wealthy) and increased tax gas (which will hurt poor people) in order to help repair infrastructure (help everyone), set up pre k education (which will help poor people) and public works.
That’s only a recent phenom. Until recently the Republican voter were more likely to be college graduates, and Democrats less than a high school education.
Sure, and it could swing back if the Democrats decide that populism works for them and they can leverage it.
Though being the party of minorities puts a crimp in that a bit since the low-education people trend towards racism and the like.
But doctors, lawyers, Ph. D’s were more likely to be liberals.
So, basically, the GOP got the middle of the pack. Those that went to college to get jobs.
But by increase it will really be just shifting it back to previous levels. We’re at record lows due to the GOP’s fetish against higher earners paying more. There is some dissidence within the party as to what makes someone wealthy or rich so the cut-offs are always debated but that is a healthy discussion to have.
I agree, I wouldn’t want that to happen to the Democratic party. It’s just that I’m not going to take warnings from Republicans seriously when they raise the alarm that the Progressives have gone too far. The “radical left” in this country right now would probably place us somewhere near European standards, and they hold no power to boot. I’m not pulling my fainting couch out any time soon.
Thy pearls are safe, from thine clutch,
Thy monocle secure, in thine eye.
Fainting couch covered, out of touch,
Thy sniffle hanky, does remain dry.
Exactly. We’ll mind our own house, thank you very much. I’m sure the David Brookses and Ross Douthats of the world are very concerned, but that’s their lookout.