The Trouble With Appeasement
Paul Krugman on MSNBC discusses his view that “you can’t actually satisfy the crazies by trying to offer substantive concessions”
Very true. And as Steve Benen says John Harwood’s point may be even more fundamental:
“I gotta tell you what a White House official told me today: ‘Our problem right now is, if we tell some of the Republican opponents in the Senate, ‘You can have everything you want in the bill,’ they still won’t vote for it.’” In part, as per Benen, I think that’s because “Republican lawmakers don’t support meaningful health care reform.”
But I think there’s a larger dynamic at play. In foreign policy, liberals often believe that disputes with foreign actors can and should be settled through negotiation and compromise. That’s because international relations isn’t a zero-sum affair. Conflict is costly to both parties, good relations bring benefits to both parties, so disagreement is generally amenable to compromise. Ideological disagreement isn’t zero-sum either. Neither conservatives nor progressives are wedded to principles that require defense of wasteful Medicare spending. But partisan politics is zero-sum.
A “win” for the Democrats is a “loss” for Republicans. And I the predominant thinking in the Republican Party at the moment is that inflicting legislative defeats on Democrats will lead to electoral defeats for Democrats. That makes the GOP hard to bargain with.
more:
http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/08/the-trouble-with-appeasement.php