Monday Open Thread

“Moo may represent an idea, but only the cow knows.”

–Mason Cooley

17 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

    • Voyageur says:

      Yeah, sure.  Say, how 'd we do the year the left coalesced around McGovern again?   We won DC and Massachusetts?

      So, not so good?

      • The US has changed in numerous ways in the 46 years since 1972. Many of those changes might impact electoral politics. Discuss.

        • Davie says:

          Meanwhile, this might be useful advice for Dems:

          “The potential center-left majority in this country — and it’s very real — has to actually organize and elect people to office,” the political scientist Theda Skocpol told me while I was reporting my column this week.

          I think that’s the most important message for any progressives feeling despondent about President Trump’s second Supreme Court nomination, which is set to be announced tonight: Elections matter. Miserably low turnout in the 2014 midterms helped Republicans take the Senate, which in turn allowed them to steal a Supreme Court seat from Barack Obama. And mediocre turnout in 2016 helped Donald Trump to win the presidency, which has allowed him to nominate two justices.

          The best issues are those on which Democrats hold a decisive advantage in public opinion. Health insurance is a good example. So are taxation, corporate power and the Trump administration’s corruption. All of these issues can be grist for a nominee’s Senate hearing.

          My column focuses on how Democrats should respond now, and my main advice is to focus on this year’s elections. As always, I welcome feedback by email (leonhardt@nytimes.com), Twitter or Facebook.

           

        • Voyageur says:

          You 're right, Corky.  There were a lot of those changes by 84 when Dems rejected the neo-liberal politics of Gary Hart and rallied around the comfortable old left model of Walter Mondale.

          So, how did that work out?  We won DC and Minnesota?

          So, not so good?

          Then in 1992, we told the left to go suck eggs, rallied behind center-left Bill Clinton and won, repeating the trick in 1996?

          And center left barrack Obama won in 2008 and 2012.

          And you want us to rally behind a 28 year old socialist and a 79 year old Socialist in 2020 because that way we can be sure we can win — uhh — D.C.?

          Discuss.

           

    • JohnInDenver says:

      Prof. Loomis, source of Zappatero's insight, is writing from Rhode Island, home to no Republicans elected to the Senate, House or statewide office. Their legislature does have some: Seats in the Upper House 5/38, Seats in the Lower House 11/75.

      I can see why a tenured associate professor in a state university in an overwhelmingly Democratic state would be able to urge boldness on his blog. 

       

      • unnamed says:

        The issue I have is on one hand, the extreme left will not be able to get elected just anywhere and not every Senator can be Bernie Sanders.  On the other hand, it isn't the 70's, '80's, or the '90's and we cannot be reactive and act like it still is, because we lose voters who want a real alternative by doing that. 

        I think we need to play some identity politics, some kitchen table/economic issues and some "Republicans are fascists". 

        Don't know if I'm making any sense or just typing out of my ass.

      • DaftPunk says:

        The only way to get elected in RI is as a Democrat, so they have one of the most fossilized, old-boy network, cronyist, party machine Democratic Party apparatuses in the nation. That results in anti-choice, and pro-gun people running as Democrats, and has little to do with the actual political mood of the state.

        Rhode Island is probably more traditionally liberal than Colorado, but accusing the author (who is quite an excellent writer) of out of touch coastal liberal bias is a lot easier than evaluating his argument on its merits.

        • JohnInDenver says:

          Huh … Republicans elected (and re-elected) Governors in 95 and 99; 03 and 07. In 2011, the person elected was Lincoln Chafee, an "Independent" who had formerly been a Republican Senator (and whose father had been a Republican Governor) and who then became a Democrat for the last two years of his term (and for an abortive run for President).

          And if Democrats have "the only way to get elected" — why aren't they all true-blue progressives?

          Finally, I didn't label him as "out of touch coastal liberal" … though he very well could be. I do think his tenured position in Rhode Island, home of a diverse (and overpowering) Democratic Party, helps explain why he can be so bold. As best I can tell, he isn't and hasn't been a candidate, a campaign manager, or fund-raiser for a state-wide or national office. [That isn't a condemnation — I've not done any of those things, either.] But a single minded commitment to pushing Democrats to the left hasn't yet been shown to be a winning strategy consistently. If it worked, the Democrats wouldn't be down 850+ state legislative seats from the 2008 peak, and needing a flip of 500 legislative seats to equal the Republicans.

          • RepealAndReplace says:

            "But a single minded commitment to pushing Democrats to the left hasn't yet been shown to be a winning strategy consistently."

            Ah, but John, didn't you know that according to our Lefty friends, the only reasons Dems have lost is because we didn't go far enough to the left.

             

             

  1. Voyageur says:

    Trump is giving a major speech tonight in which he will stink

    Stay upwind, America.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.