A Problem of Shrinkage

[Samurai Waki]

It'll be interesting to see where both parties end up in 50 years... that is, if we're still a democracy (you can never be to sure about these things). Hopefully the repubs take notes from the Libertarians...

[Lemur]

I've posted it before, I'll post it again. Maybe one of these times you'll remember it. The Battleground Poll has been carried out since 1991. Question D3 asks respondents to self identify as either Very Conservative, Somewhat Conservative, Moderate, Somewhat Liberal, or Very Liberal. See for yourself..

Your link, she is broken. Here's the fixed version.

An interesting poll. They ask for liberal/conservative self-definition in relationship to government and politics, not on any other subjects (say, social issues or finance), which is interesting thing one. They also provide no definition of "conservative" or "liberal," which is interesting thing two.

Here's what I would like to see to make the "center-right" mantra believable: A breakdown of which issues represent "conservative" and "liberal," and then a broad-based poll of Americans seeing how they fall on the issues. Anything less is just poll-smoking. CA, can you whip a poll like that out of your posterior?

[drone]

I think saying "America is a center-right" country means this, precisely: "Yes, we lost the last election very badly, and our party is in eclipse, but more Americans agree with us than with anyone else, so everything's going to be okay."

Nothing more, nothing less.

Well, I said Fox would spin it that way. Americans are more religious than their Euro counterparts, and generally Americans don't want the government sticking their nose into their business. The GOP abandoned both the financial and social conservatives, but they still want people to believe that's what they stand for. Americans are waking up to the fact that they have been conned, and are abandoning the GOP.

If they had competent leadership, one of the larger third parties would be actively courting disenfranchised GOP moderates and conservative leaning indies. Unfortunately, most of the Libertarians are still wasted from 4/20 and haven't jumped at the unique opportunity being presented.

[Vladimir]

Ok, I've got to ask: What's with the Fox obsession? I didn't mention it or link it and yet the next three replies all attack it. Is this the new "Fox News" defense debate tactic I've heard about? Can I retaliate with the Chewbacca Defense ?

When you repeat a well-known Fox News talking point verbatim, people just might notice.

So it is the Fox News Defense. Good show.
My only response is: Why would a Wookie be on Endor?

It's your typical and mindless demagoguery. Pick a symbol of hatred and whenever that symbol associates itself with something you disagree with, equate the two. It doesn't even matter if the person or idea is directly associated with the symbol (e.g. I don't watch Fox News, but hold many of the same views presented there). Rally 'round the flag boys! (BTW I call Godwin in two) Personally, I recommend one of these to remedy the problem.

I read an Air Force version of the Chewbacca defense and it's hilarious.

[Lemur]

Vladimir, the cool thing about your posts is that they are entirely calorie-free, so I can consume as many as I like without worrying about my waistline.

Meanwhile, yet another take on the subject:

Since Bush's re-election in 2004, the GOP has lost ground electorally in the South and the rest of the nation. But the erosion has been much more severe outside the South. That dynamic has threatened Republicans with a spiral of concentration and contraction. Because the party has lost so much ground elsewhere, the South represents an increasing share of what remains -- both in Congress and in its electoral coalition. The party's increasing identification with staunch Southern economic and social conservatism, however, may be accelerating its decline in more-moderate-to-liberal areas of the country, including the Northeast and the West Coast. "Many of the things they have done to become the dominant party in the South have caused them to be less successful in other places," said veteran Democratic strategist Bill Carrick, a South Carolina native.

These intertwined trends -- the Republican Party's growing reliance on the South and the erosion of its strength elsewhere, particularly along the coasts -- have prompted some unusually public soul-searching within the GOP about whether the party has grown too defined by the unflinchingly conservative priorities of its most loyal region. Although the GOP congressional leadership includes more non-Southerners than it did in the 1990s, much of the party's most militant opposition to President Obama has come from Southern leaders, such as South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford and Texas Gov. Rick Perry. The Texan even raised the possibility of secession in response to Obama's initiatives.

In the view of former Rep. Charles Bass, R-N.H., who was defeated in 2006, "The current crisis of the Republican Party is whether it wants to be a regional party or whether it can try to expand ideologically and appeal to other regions."

[Xiahou]

I still don't buy that. As per the Pew study, the GOP has certainly shrank- but it hasn't grown significantly more conservative, which only serves to keep the party in flux. The Republican party needs to stand for something and until they figure that out, they won't get back in power.

Being the Democrat party Lite isn't a meaningful alternative for voters. They need to outline a contrasting platform, and more importantly, convince voters that they can deliver on it. Until they do that, the party will continue to flounder.

I read an Air Force version of the Chewbacca defense and it's hilarious.

I fixed my links.

[Lemur]

An honest-to-goodness call to duty:

Powell has to accept that he is in a unique position to command attention and lead the Republican Party—or at least that part of it that isn’t consumed with defending the indefensible on torture or living in a fantasy world where the economy would be booming today if it just wasn’t for Obama’s budget deficits. It’s a pretty small constituency these days—most of those, like me, who share Powell’s views have left his party to become independents—but it may be enough to build a foundation on that can offer a meaningful challenge to the dominant Cheney-Limbaugh-Palin wing of the Republican Party that views all efforts to expand its membership as a sell-out to be resisted at all cost, even if it means further political losses. But at the end of the day, the job of a political party is to win elections and to win elections it must be inclusive, not exclusive.


Thus the ultimate message Powell has to offer Republicans is the most persuasive one of all—follow him and win or follow Cheney-Limbaugh-Palin and lose. Personally, I would like to see Powell follow in the steps of Dwight D. Eisenhower and run for president—I’ll sign up for his campaign today even if it means having to rejoin the Republican Party. But if he is serious about not wishing to do that, then Powell has a responsibility to help those who share his vision by lending his enormous credibility, popularity and fund-raising ability to their efforts. If he fails to do so he risks being seen by history as someone who walked away when the times demanded that those who share his beliefs stand and fight for what they believe.

[Xiahou]

What exactly does Powell stand for anyway? IIRC, one of his stated reasons for endorsing Obama over his long-time friend McCain, was that he didn't want to see any more conservative SCOTUS appointments.

Personally, I think Powell's endorsement was pretty much a shameless case of bandwagon jumping, but even taken at face value, I don't think the reasons he stated would be reasons many Republicans would want to be associated with.

I used to think very highly of Powell, but the more I hear from him the less I like. His character took several whacks during his tenure as Sec of State starting with his schizophrenic statements on Iraq and his involvement in "Plame-gate". Combined with his head-scratching Obama endorsement, he begins to come off as someone who is more interested in being a media darling than someone who actually wants to take hard stances.

[Askthepizzaguy]

I'm not laughing at you, Xiahou... I'm laughing at myself. It's like I am your twin from an evil parallel universe or something. I find myself appreciating Colin Powell and his defiant stance against the Cheney wing of the Republican Party... he's practically the only Republican I support at this point.

You probably mentioned somewhere before what your opinion of the previous administration was. Who among the current party leadership do you like? I'm wondering if we are really the exact opposite or not. And if so... it still puzzles me. Surely there is some kind of common ground, or set of basic principles we all agree on. But again and again I find that some people really do see the world from a totally different perspective and it changes almost everything.

[Beskar]

I was reading the title "A Problem of Shrinkage" and at first thought, I thought it was about the over-medication of Ritalin and propagation of disorders through dodgy dealing in psychiatry.

[Lemur]

Big, number-filled article about shrinkage (not the kind in your swim trunks, you perverts): The Ice Age Cometh

I've made a career out of counting votes, and the numbers tell a clear story; the demographics of America are changing in a way that is deadly for the Republican Party as it exists today. A GOP ice age is on the way.

Demographic change is irritating to politicos, since it works on elections much as rigged dice do on a Las Vegas craps table: it is a game changer. For years, Republicans won elections because the country was chock-full of white middle-class voters who mostly pulled the GOP lever on Election Day. Today, however, that formula is no longer enough.

It was a huge shock to the GOP when Barack Obama won Republican Indiana last year. The bigger news was how he did it. Latino voters delivered the state. Exit polls showed that they provided Obama with a margin of more than 58,000 votes in a state he carried by a slim 26,000 votes. That's right, GOP, you've entered a brave new world ruled by Latino Hoosiers, and you're losing.

In 1980, Latino voters cast about 2% of all votes. Last year it was 9%, and Obama won that Hispanic vote with a crushing 35-point margin. By 2030, the Latino share of the vote is likely to double. In Texas, the crucial buckle for the GOP's Electoral College belt, the No. 1 name for new male babies — many of whom will vote one day — is Jose. Young voters are another huge GOP problem. Obama won voters under 30 by a record 33 points. And the young voters of today, while certainly capable of changing their minds, do become all voters tomorrow.

[Strike For The South]

Jose has been the #1 name since '97.

As Bush showed the right white man can still capture the "hispanic" vote. Not to mention many hispanics are social conservatives esp. in South Texas. People seem to think Hispanic=black and that's not really the case. Considering most of these articles are written by old white men whose connection with mexicans stem from there front yard it really does not surprise me.

[Xiahou]

I hate identity politics. It's all about- how can we pander to latinos or how can we pander to blacks, ect... as though each entire race has a hive mind and is in lockstep on the issues. I think that's so much of what is wrong with politics today....

Ah well, not like it's gonna change...

[ICantSpellDawg]

Republicans are the natural party of the current general Hispanic consensus. I like hispanics. I don't see them any differently from Italians, other than they tend to be more humble. Soon enough hispanics will stop being our modern day "Eyrish, Eyetalians" and we can get back into the process of adding them to Republican ranks.

Current Republican demographics? No. Demographics of tomorrow? Yep.

Identity politics are important. How else can 1 man or woman cater to whole massive segments of the population? The reality is that people tend to be attracted to those who remind them of themselves. When you can find a common denominator with Charisma, you've got the key to the castle. Obama is literally THE Identity politico and I think that is good. Would you want someone representing you who had absolutely no idea where you came from?

[Lemur]

I hate identity politics. It's all about- how can we pander to latinos or how can we pander to blacks, ect... as though each entire race has a hive mind and is in lockstep on the issues. I think that's so much of what is wrong with politics today....

But don't you, yourself, based on your age, race and location, vote exactly how identity politics indicate you would? I think your lament is a little naive.

Another article about the (entirely unproved) demographic doom of the GOP:

For the past few months, political analysts and demographers have been poring over the results of the 2008 election and comparing them with presidential results from the last two decades. From whatever angle of their approach -- age, race, economic status, geography -- they have come to a remarkably similar conclusion. Almost all indicators are pressing the Republicans into minority status.

Republicans are still capable of winning individual elections, but until they find a way to reverse or at least minimize these broader changes in the country, their chances of returning to majority status will be severely reduced.

Lots of detail in the article itself.

[CountArach]

I hate identity politics. It's all about- how can we pander to latinos or how can we pander to blacks, ect... as though each entire race has a hive mind and is in lockstep on the issues. I think that's so much of what is wrong with politics today....

Ah well, not like it's gonna change...

On the other hand identity politics allows those with a shared race, class, gender, etc to band together and demand rights that they believe are theirs. That they believe they need. Identity politics is only natural and has been the norm since the birth of democracy (That is to say a democracy with an expanded suffrage, not the faux-democracy of the 18th and 19th centuries).

Further, as Lemur said, your own views on politics are to a large extent determined by your situation; by your social consciousness. It is simply that, as a member of the ruling class/race/gender, it is natural for you to also look down on identity politics because it is counter to your interests.

[Xiahou]

Further, as Lemur said, your own views on politics are to a large extent determined by your situation; by your social consciousness. It is simply that, as a member of the ruling class/race/gender, it is natural for you to also look down on identity politics because it is counter to your interests.

It's amazing that you and Lemur have such insight into my life- you two must be psychic. What ruling class am I a member of exactly?

And Lemur, you know my political views and say I fit into the demographic that represents those views- tell me about who I am then. You should have no trouble detailing what ethno-social stereotypes I fit into since you know my political views.

[CountArach]

It's amazing that you and Lemur have such insight into my life- you two must be psychic. What ruling class am I a member of exactly?

You are most likely a member of the petit bourgeoisie who has bourgeois sympathies. By aligning with the bourgeoisie you are perpetuating their class' rule.

[Lemur]

And Lemur, you know my political views and say I fit into the demographic that represents those views- tell me about who I am then. You should have no trouble detailing what ethno-social stereotypes I fit into since you know my political views.

I'm not claiming any special insight into your life, Xiahou. You're a white middle-class suburban male in his late thirties or early forties. Maybe in your fifties, but I don't think so. What they would call a "skilled" worker. Your demo, while a tad young, is the bedrock of the Republican party.

You decry "identity politics," but mebbe it's not so obvious when you're the identity being pandered to. Just a thought.

[Xiahou]

You are most likely a member of the petit bourgeoisie who has bourgeois sympathies. By aligning with the bourgeoisie you are perpetuating their class' rule.

Guess again. You must be a proletariat by your views, huh?

I'm not claiming any special insight into your life, Xiahou. You're a white middle-class suburban male in his late thirties or early forties. Maybe in your fifties, but I don't think so. What they would call a "skilled" worker. Your demo, while a tad young, is the bedrock of the Republican party.

Are you describing me or yourself? If it's me, you're wrong. Either way, it's not particularly insightful. I mean, you "narrow" my age down to a range of about 25 yrs and still blow it- come on. White? Yes, along with 70% of the country last I checked. Male? Yes, but you already knew that. Suburban? Not really. I'm an apartment dweller and live in a city of about 50,000.

You decry "identity politics," but mebbe it's not so obvious when you're the identity being pandered to. Just a thought.

Or maybe not, huh? Like I said, I'm guessing your above description probably fits you to a tee- does it not? Why aren't you a Republican? They're the party that panders to your demographic aren't you? I guess you're a sell-out. :laugh4

Yes, I decry identity politics. Can I take that to mean you like them? I find it repugnant that people are stereotyped into groups- racial groupings being most repugnant - and then are assigned a slate of political views that they all must support by virtue of belonging to said group. It's prejudiced and divisive as hell. Both parties do it to varying degrees- and it stinks.

[CountArach]

Guess again. You must be a proletariat by your views, huh?

Enlightened bourgeoisie.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Oooh I finally get to agree with Xiahou.

Yeah I don't like identity politics and stereotyping. Even if the stereotype fit the mold more than half of the time, it's still a mild form of prejudice to put people into boxes based on superficial data such as race, age, or social status. Plenty of wealthy types are interested in the poor; plenty of poor people who think excessive taxation is bad, whites who support affirmative action, minorities who do not... etc.

I take it Xiahou has plenty of conservative viewpoints, but even if that is the case I am doubtful I could still predict his stance on a given issue. Many people think independently.

In short; Pizza doesn't like the box. It is full of crumbs and crusts.

[Xiahou]

Enlightened bourgeoisie.

So you're one of the one's exploiting me!
I own no property, no means of production, have never hired, fired or even supervised anyone. I sell my labor to those with means in return for wages- sounds like I'm a proletariat. Funny thing though... I don't feel exploited.

I'm sure it's because I'm not "enlightened"- maybe one day I'll have my eyes opened and buy into all that marxist drivel.

Oooh I finally get to agree with Xiahou.

I'd better go to bed. Clearly I'm beginning to hallucinate.

[CountArach]

So you're one of the one's exploiting me!
I own no property, no means of production, have never hired, fired or even supervised anyone. I sell my labor to those with means in return for wages- sounds like I'm a proletariat.

Nor do I, however by birth I am a part of the supervisory class (As that is what my dad does, much to my chagrin/distates). Personally though I fit into the proletarian paridigm, and sometimes I do feel exploited by the company I work for - the level of profits they earn is far too high for the wages I get paid. They also expect me to do things that I would normally have moral qualms about.

Funny thing though... I don't feel exploited.

I've heard several proletarians give speeches that disagree with you.

EDIT: But yeah, how about that GOP?

[Lemur]

Or maybe not, huh? Like I said, I'm guessing your above description probably fits you to a tee- does it not?

Nope. I'm rural, not suburban or small-urban, as you appear to be. And I'm not a "skilled worker," I'm what would be referred to by the demo wonks as a "professional."

As a professional who's been to college, I fit into a different demo.

So I take it you're either radically younger or older than I thought. I'll just point out that if it's the latter, you fit into the Republican demo even better.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

I'm sure it's because I'm not "enlightened"- maybe one day I'll have my eyes opened and buy into all that marxist drivel.

"How do you tell a Communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin."

[Lemur]

If you're going to quote Saint Ronald, EMFM, at least give the man attribution.

[Lemur]

-- delete me please, problems with connection caused double-post --

[Strike For The South]

Enlightened bourgeoisie.

When you use outdated terms to describe the class system I can't take you seriously.

I imagine as an enlightend bourgeoisie your name will be on the protected scrolls as the uncouth masses come down and kill the white men and rape the white women?

Will you get a nice clerical position?

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

If you're going to quote Saint Ronald, EMFM, at least give the man attribution.

It was in quotation marks, I figured that most people would know who it was from or Google it if they didn't.