A Tired Refrain: "Democrats, Move to the Right!"

[KingFlorez]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-a-palermo/a-tired-refrain-democra_b_34973.html

A Tired Refrain: "Democrats, Move to the Right!"

Writing in The New York Times, Thomas Edsall offers his erudition to the herd of lesser intellects on the Right in interpreting the recent midterm elections. The party line: 1). Only "moderate" Republicans were the true losers; 2). The Democrats who won were "conservative" candidates; and 3). When the Democrats take control of Congress in January they better hew to the "center" lest they risk being relegated back to the minority.

First, if not for the magic of gerrymandering the Republican losses would have been much higher. Only about thirty House seats out of 435 were in play, and it is not surprising that "conservatives" held on to their "safe" seats. (All of the "liberal" Democrats held their seats too.) If voters truly desired "conservative" candidates, one would expect that at least one Democrat would have been defeated. Not since 1938 did a party register zero losses in a midterm election, and the Democrats did not drop a single seat.

Gerrymandering is impossible in statewide elections and it was in those races where "conservatives" got creamed. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, George Allen of Virginia, Conrad Burns of Montana, Mike DeWine of Ohio, and Jim Talent of Missouri all had 100 percent voting records from "Focus on the Family" and the "Christian Coalition." Santorum was near the top of the GOP leadership roster, and he was one of the most fundamentalist Senators in recent memory; Allen planned to tap into Bush's evangelical base to secure the 2008 presidential nomination. All five losers had strongly identified themselves as "movement conservatives." I would not interpret their ouster as a sign that voters were affirming "conservatism."

[Redstone]

1. Thanks for the mention of gerrymandering. If not for that, the Repub losses

would have been MUCH worse.

Redstone

[AndyTiedye]

2. The Pendulum Has Gone Far Too Far to the Right Already

[The Magistrate]

3. A Brief Rebuttal, Sir, To Mr. Edsell's 'Three Points'....

First, that "moderate" Republicans were defeated in droves demonstrates the center of the polity has turned decidedly against the extreme right character of the Republican party, which these figures, whatever their personal merits, stood for in their eyes. The loss of 'moderates' leaves the Republican party an even more concentrated slurry of right-wing extremism, that will prove ever more offensive to the center of the political spectrum. Losses in New England and the Upper Midwest and the Southwest by the Republicans make it ever more obvious it is really a regional, Southern power, and for better or worse, the country can effectively be united against the South.

Second, in all instances where Democrats defeated incumbent Republicans, or Republicans running for open seats, the Democrat was perceptibly to the left of the defeated Republican. It does not matter that a number of these figures are not particularly far to the left pole of the Democratic Party spectrum: their victories represent collectively a noteable shift towards the left by voters in the center, and cannot honestly be viewed as endorsement of "conservatism" in any form.

Third, the new Democrats were elected by people who are fed to the teeth with Republican extremism, and the mismanaged cronyism and corruption it has displayed. The people expect the Democrats to fight this, not to reach some accommodation with it. We risk return to minority status only if we do the latter, and not the former.

[Christian30]

4. Right on...

I hope the DNC adds the above to their talking points.

[TahitiNut]

5. "people expect the Democrats to fight"

You're damned fucking-A right, there! :grr:

If the Democrats don't show spine, they can count on wandering in the desert for 40 years. The Quislings can eat my shorts. (And, before I do the laundry, I have just the pair all ready for 'em.)