Originally Posted by Deb C

The bipartisan cry is that austerity reigns supreme as the solution to our ills. This, at a time when putting money into the pockets of those who will spend, would be a common sense approach.

That's just my very humble opinion.

Very admirable of you. John Maynard Keynes was far less humble about it, the bum.

- Rasmussen just sucks! JPT did decide to listen to them, however.

Below is a partial table from porktacos' analysis -

but it includes his concluding average bias of Rasmussen vs PPP polsters.

PPP is supposed to be the Left wing biased pollster, but they still had a slight (shown as a negative 0.93) tilt toward Romney compared to the actual result.

Whereas Rasmussn bias toward Romney was 4-5x more!

This is from the last polls taken where Ras is suppose to become more accurate, after weeks of push-polling, in order to be seen later as a credible pollster. Hmm, looks like they might have forgotten to do that.

Colorado 5.386.....-3..... 0.62.....-8.38
Florida 0.881.....-2..... 0.12.....-2.88
Iowa 5.812.....-1.... -3.81....-6.81
Michigan
Minnesota
New Hampshire
North Carolina
Ohio
PA
VA
WI

Averge Bias: PPP -0.93
Ras -4.43

see the whole chart here -

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/1...asmussen-sucks

Cell phones. The robot pollsters did reasonably well in 2008 when there were fewer voters who rely entirely upon land-line phones, but with more such voters the polls leaned increasingly to the Right because people who rely entirely upon cell phones are much younger. Oddly an internet-based poll worked better this year, and I would have never expected that.

Scott Rasputin has lost credibility with his 2008/2012 model.

Indeed

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

Cell phones. The robot pollsters did reasonably well in 2008 when there were fewer voters who rely entirely upon land-line phones, but with more such voters the polls leaned increasingly to the Right because people who rely entirely upon cell phones are much younger. Oddly an internet-based poll worked better this year, and I would have never expected that.

Scott Rasputin has lost credibility with his 2008/2012 model.

According to Nate Silver, not as bad as venerable old Gallup.

Originally Posted by annla899

But the US is not Europe. Although certainly influenced by Europe, it is significantly different. And when you say "European man," it's clearly what we here in the US call a dog whistle. You mean white men. And the US, unlike Europe, has never been settled solely by white men.

No, but it was mainly settled by Europeans so it's best looked at as a branch of European culture. Europeans led it, built it and defined it. The next largest group (around 10 percent) who were dragged to the colonies/the US against their will then added their mix to the American character. The rest is of marginal importance. Yes, the US is not Europe, but on the other hand, Poland is not the same as Norway either. What we share as a culture outweighs what sets us apart.
For instance, it only sounds like a dog whistle to you because both the US and Europe is so completely steeped in Cultural Marxism that we immediately think "thought crime" as soon as one says a forbidden word, even if it's the matter of a truism, like pointing out our own existence. Acknowledging ourselves - as "white men" if you prefer - is forbidden, at least in positive terms, while at the same time we are forced to acknowledge, be positive about and respect everyone else.
As for the term itself, I use European Man in preference to "white men" beacuse the latter is a biological and racial term, and I want to emphasize the spritual and cultural values that transcends it.

Nate Silver has come up with an interesting aspect of the past election - the role of Silicon Valley types in backing the obvious high-tech advantage of Democratic candidates at least on the national level or perhaps in states with similiar high-tech firms -

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes...o-p-campaigns/

In Silicon Valley, Technology Talent Gap Threatens G.O.P. Campaigns

....

The reason is that Democrats’ strength in the region is hard to separate out from the growth of its core industry — information technology – and the advantage that having access to the most talented individuals working in the field could provide to Democratic campaigns.

Companies like Google and Apple do not have their own precincts on Election Day. However, it is possible to make some inferences about just how overwhelmingly Democratic are the employees at these companies, based on fund-raising data. (The Federal Election Commission requires that donors to presidential campaigns disclose their employer when they make a campaign contribution.)

Among employees who work for Google, Mr. Obama received about $720,000 in itemized contributions this year, compared with only $25,000 for Mr. Romney. That means that Mr. Obama collected almost 97 percent of the money between the two major candidates.

Apple employees gave 91 percent of their dollars to Mr. Obama. At eBay, Mr. Obama received 89 percent of the money from employees.

Over all, among the 10 American-based information technology companies on Fortune’s list of “most admired companies,” Mr. Obama raised 83 percent of the funds between the two major party candidates.

Mr. Obama’s popularity among the staff at these companies holds even for those which are not headquartered in California. About 81 percent of contributions at Microsoft, which is headquartered in Redmond, Wash., went to Mr. Obama. So did 77 percent of those at I.B.M., which is based in Armonk, N.Y.

It does not require an algorithm to deduce that the sort of employees who may be willing to donate substantial money to a political campaign may also be those who would consider working for it.

Since Democrats had the support of 80 percent or 90 percent of the best and brightest minds in the information technology field, it shouldn’t be surprising that Mr. Obama’s information technology infrastructure was viewed as state-of-the-art exemplary, whereas everyone from Republican volunteers to Silicon Valley journalists have criticized Mr. Romney’s systems. Mr. Romney’s get-out-the-vote application, Project Orca, is widely viewed as having failed on Election Day, perhaps contributing to a disappointing Republican turnout.

This is not intended to absolve Mr. Romney and his campaign entirely. There were undoubtedly many bright and talented information technology professionals who worked for Mr. Romney, and who might have fielded a better product given better management.

Even if only 10 percent or 20 percent of elite information technology professionals would consider working for a Republican like Mr. Romney, this is still a reasonably large talent pool to draw from.

But Democrats are drawing from a much larger group of potential staff and volunteers in Silicon Valley.

Perhaps a different type of Republican candidate, one whose views on social policy were more in line with the tolerant and multicultural values of the Bay Area, and the youthful cultures of the leading companies here, could gather more support among information technology professionals.

Ron Paul, the libertarian-leaning Republican, raised about $42,000 from Google employees, considerably more than Mr. Romney did.

I realize the Libertarians might find something in that last line about Ron Paul, but it is likely that a lot of the high tech people (Birkenstock and Granola bars), particularly in CA, are peaceniks that liked Paul's seeming anti- involvement message. Take that away and the $42K probable gets wacked pretty hard.

Feel free to fill in caption -

In 2008 the connection between income and voting for President had never been so slight. The Republicans seemed to gain a little among high-income earners (or grabbers, depending on your ideology). Maybe the difference between 2008 and 2012 is that in 2008 the financial industry voted for Obama to save their income streams and in 2012 they voted to have or protect tax cuts. Such indicates political success more than failure. The old connection between voting Republican and having an above-average income, let alone an above-average level of formal education, is now weak to non-existent. It is not that the Republican and Democratic Parties have been shifting across the political spectrum.

Information technology is of course a preserve of well-educated people, and I can just imagine what such people think of the anti-rational, anti-scientific rhetoric that Mitt Romney never opposed. Add to that the information technology business probably has a disproportionate number of Jews, Hispanics, and Asians and is not strictly a male preserve.

Just before the election I overheard a sort of generic attack ad. Somebody-supposedly from Eastern Europe-condemned socialism. Reminds of something I saw years ago, a newsreel like propaganda thingie from the previous saeculum, in which a condemnation of socialism was accompanied with a bouncing ball.

742. Help Obama to win the second term (10/24/2012)

The recent Gallup poll showsthat Mitt Romney leads over President Barack Obama in president Campaign.That’s just a gimmick to cheat people. The election result is pre-decided.Obama will stay for his second term. It doesn’t relate to any politics. It isfor a case of the Feds. They need Obama’s Health Reform that they forced ChiefJustice Roberts to change his mind in June to pass the “Health Reform”. (see “ 726.The surprise turnaround of Chief Justice (7/4/2012)”)

To keep Obama to stay in hisseat, they have to create an economic background that favors him. Two monthsbefore voting date, in early September, we saw European bank chief Draghi said thebank would buy the bond with no limit. How could this affect US presidentelection?

Draghi helps out Obama campaign

By Robin Harding inWashington September 6, 2012


Barack Obama’s chances ofre-election as US president rose on Thursday and the words that did it were nothis but Mario Draghi’s.

Long before Mr Obama stoodup to accept the Democratic nomination in Charlotte, North Carolina, the headof the European Central Bank had sketched out a new plan to buy the bonds oftroubled eurozone countries.


That will not move thepolls; it will not move a single vote. But Mr Draghi has lowered the gravest ofrisks to Mr Obama: a pre-election meltdown in the eurozone that would haveblown up banks, pulverised Wall Street, and routed a fragile US economy backinto recession.

If that happened, it wouldnot be Mr Obama’s fault, but he would get the blame. Just as the failure ofLehman Brothers doomed his rival John McCain in 2008, a eurozone implosionwould create economic odds too great for Mr Obama to surmount.

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/bc1cf132-f831-11e1-bec8-00144feabdc0.html#axzz261Uy9nmA

Within days, Federal ReserveChief Bernanke pushed out another QE which would push up economy temporarilybut hurt it in long term with inflation. The Republicans felt it immediately. Thetiming of issuing QE3 is not a coincidence. It helps Obama.

Fed risks political fallout from QE3

By Robin Harding and JamesPoliti in Washington September 14, 2012

Mitt Romney, the Republicancandidate, duly opened fire on Friday after the Fed began an open-ended thirdround of quantitative easing (QE3), under which it will buy $40bn ofmortgage-backed securities a month.

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/b7de9070-fe77-11e1-8028-00144feabdc0.html#axzz26Vualgix

QE3 will create anotherhousing bubble.

Marc Faber: Fed's QE forever is ludicrous; nocountry has become rich from consumption

Source: BI-ME , Author:Constantine Gardner Fri September 14,2012

"Asset prices will goup and the money will flow to the Mayfair Economy," he said, defining thelatter as an "economy of the rich people whose assets prices go up andwhose net worth increases" without any trickle down benefit to the realeconomy.

What you have is a smalleconomy that is booming and the majority of the economy is being damaged by QE,Faber explains.

Faber sees the Fed'smonetary policies over the last 15 years as mainly responsible for the variousasset bubbles (Nasdaq,real estate etc...) leading to the subprime crisis in 2007."The money printers and the neo-Keynesians interventionists areresponsible for the crisis, reckons Faber, and people should know this."

Dr Bernanke's attempt toboost growth and reduce unemployment will end up, according to Dr. Faber, in afiscal Grand Canyon with never ending deficits, the majority of the economybeing damaged, the man in the street facing higher prices and losing his job.

http://www.bi-me.com/main.php?id=59324&t=1&c=62&cg=4&mset=

Faber sees the Fed'smonetary policies over the last 15 years as mainly responsible for the variousasset bubbles (Nasdaq, real estate etc...), the Nasdaq bubble is the dot.combubble, I talked about these two bubbles from #733 to #739. And the FederalReserve now continues to create the third one. At the purpose to help the Fedsto remove the hot potatoes in their hands to the ordinary people.

Not to be a sore winner or rub salt in the wound, but this is a fascinating, real-time chronology of a 2012 election eve meltdown from a Rightee blogger -

http://hillbuzz.org/1018pm-cst-barac...h-thread-73447

Near the start, at 4pm CST, we have this post -

...Chris Matthews’ Hardball is starting soon. Everything before this was just the warmup. I have been waiting for four years to see Matthews meltdown when Obama loses.

and from there, one gets the full sense of how delusional folks like this were.

At about the time that Ohio is announced for Obama, the site goes down. One can only imagine what was going on.

Soon after, the site comes back up and tells us that it had come under cyber-attack (dirty commies!)

It then goes through the various steps in accepting change (denial, anger, 'intellectual' acceptance, bargaining, and emotional acceptance) but in a rather random and repeating way.

It also has a long list of commenters’ postings that eventually take over as the original blogger just stops posting (again, one can only imagine).

And then toward the end, we get from "Heidi" this tweet -

Heidi says:
2012/11/07 at 12:48 am Heidi(Quote)
Tomorrow we are going out and buying more ammunition, This is one of the saddest days of my life.

Amazingly insightful stuff.

Originally Posted by playwrite

Amazingly insightful stuff.

One thing I note is a genuine feeling of impending disaster, that if those who think outside his mind set are allowed to control the country, really bad stuff happens.

Another point is the denial of reality. The notion that stuff which turned out to be absolutely true might be true was unthinkable. Truth was fiction created by political opponents out of political motivation. I of course think this is a staple of the Red world view, that conservative and religious media create a cocoon of alternate Red reality where those inclined to do so can live comfortably with their magic ponies. If Drudge is saying something that makes the magic ponies nervous, one simply does not read Drudge.

I'm also thinking, that as in JPT's case, there is an obsession with race. This is not the classic overt hatred and use of racial slurs from the old days, but the election is seen in racial terms. There seems to be a feeling that white male rule is an inherent right, the true anchor of the way things ought to be. The notion that the demographics are turning and that poor people will vote for their own interests seems somehow un-American.

But mostly it seems to me a free form open stream of conscious example of values lock. He thinks he knows what things are and how the world operates. That he does not in inconceivable and a major shock.

Not that I'd truly expect that he'll come back after his traumatic time out all that much wiser.

Another thing makes me nervous. I'm not sure the Blue world view is free of similar delusions.

Originally Posted by B Butler

One thing I note is a genuine feeling of impending disaster, that if those who think outside his mind set are allowed to control the country, really bad stuff happens.

Another point is the denial of reality. The notion that stuff which turned out to be absolutely true might be true was unthinkable. Truth was fiction created by political opponents out of political motivation. I of course think this is a staple of the Red world view, that conservative and religious media create a cocoon of alternate Red reality where those inclined to do so can live comfortably with their magic ponies. If Drudge is saying something that makes the magic ponies nervous, one simply does not read Drudge.

I'm also thinking, that as in JPT's case, there is an obsession with race. This is not the classic overt hatred and use of racial slurs from the old days, but the election is seen in racial terms. There seems to be a feeling that white male rule is an inherent right, the true anchor of the way things ought to be. The notion that the demographics are turning and that poor people will vote for their own interests seems somehow un-American.

But mostly it seems to me a free form open stream of conscious example of values lock. He thinks he knows what things are and how the world operates. That he does not in inconceivable and a major shock.

Not that I'd truly expect that he'll come back after his traumatic time out all that much wiser.

Another thing makes me nervous. I'm not sure the Blue world view is free of similar delusions.

You may have missed his suggestion of Obama's homosexual orientation.

About Blue world's delusion, I think its important to note that whatever nightmare envisioned by Blue world on 2000 election night (i.e. when the SCOTUS handed it over to him) became eventually dwarfed by the actuality that unfolded from the Bush Administration. I think one would be hard pressed to suggest that Obama's actuality could ever come close to what Red world currently envisions.

That is an enormously big difference if one gives it some thought.

Originally Posted by playwrite

You may have missed his suggestion of Obama's homosexual orientation.

About Blue world's delusion, I think its important to note that whatever nightmare envisioned by Blue world on 2000 election night (i.e. when the SCOTUS handed it over to him) became eventually dwarfed by the actuality that unfolded from the Bush Administration. I think one would be hard pressed to suggest that Obama's actuality could ever come close to what Red world currently envisions.

That is an enormously big difference if one gives it some thought.

OK, I can agree with this. My concern is the behind-the-scenes Red counter measures that we in the Blue world may simply not be able to see. "Heidi's" first thought was his/her intention to buy ammunition; this does not bode well. Can a revival of the Michigan Militia be far behind?

Originally Posted by B Butler

One thing I note is a genuine feeling of impending disaster, that if those who think outside his mind set are allowed to control the country, really bad stuff happens.

They can't simply lower their expectations, hope for the best, and wait for the worst to come to some natural and undramatic end as many liberals did in 2000 and 2004. They see impending apocalypse.

Another point is the denial of reality. The notion that stuff which turned out to be absolutely true might be true was unthinkable. Truth was fiction created by political opponents out of political motivation. I of course think this is a staple of the Red world view, that conservative and religious media create a cocoon of alternate Red reality where those inclined to do so can live comfortably with their magic ponies. If Drudge is saying something that makes the magic ponies nervous, one simply does not read Drudge.

Tough luck. Objective reality trumps all thought and speculation once it solidifies. But what must 'conservatives' accept?

1. George W. Bush was a lousy President.

2. Barack Obama is a learned, flexible, cautious person who respects legal and diplomatic niceties. Such prevents trouble that fools provoke.

3. America is not and never was a cultural monolith. Political success comes from building coalitions from putting together disparate groups on shared interests. Barack Obama is very good at that.

4. Many Americans are proud of their intellectual capacity in part for what it can do either to get them good livings or make their lives richer than otherwise. Don't knock the intellect; it can solve problems that brute force can't.

5. Barack Obama has done much objective good for America. If a conservative Republican had put an end to the most dangerous economic meltdown in 80 years, saved GM and Chrysler (which are big defense contractors as well as automakers), brought about a money-saving and asset-conserving reform of the medical-payments system, gotten America out of a pointless war, destroyed the worst terrorist in history, reduced anti-American sentiment, gotten economic growth without a speculative boom, and avoided scandals... he should have been elected in a landslide.

I suppose that the Hard Right will need to do some of the soul-searching and humble itself before it can make itself more palatable by changing.

I'm also thinking, that as in JPT's case, there is an obsession with race. This is not the classic overt hatred and use of racial slurs from the old days, but the election is seen in racial terms. There seems to be a feeling that white male rule is an inherent right, the true anchor of the way things ought to be. The notion that the demographics are turning and that poor people will vote for their own interests seems somehow un-American.

He knows enough to avoid using the overt slurs... but you can read between the lines and detect the resentment "Those people" for whom he shows no empathy "don't know their (subordinate) place". He can't recognize the validity of others' aspirations to make valuable contributions to society and get rewarded.

Tough luck to him. There is no natural hierarchy of ethnic groups.

But mostly it seems to me a free form open stream of conscious example of values lock. He thinks he knows what things are and how the world operates. That he does not in inconceivable and a major shock.

Have you ever seen him cite a scientific source? He has pretended frequently to an air of intellectual authority that few of us claim. The more fortunate one's education the more modesty one has about one's intellectual prowess. Mathematicians who talk about history, literature, and art admit that they are "only" dabblers, hobbyists, or consumers. He has a certainty about politics that only fools have.

Not that I'd truly expect that he'll come back after his traumatic time out all that much wiser.

Evidence of more wisdom would be more humility. The truly wise person recognizes how limited his knowledge is -- and as the Uncertainty Principle suggests one cannot measure reality down to the tiniest particles without altering the basic facts about them.

Another thing makes me nervous. I'm not sure the Blue world view is free of similar delusions.

We just have more good habits -- looking for differing views, thinking things out, not relying on pomposity as evidence of truthfulness, seeking out reliable sources, subjecting our statements to fact-checking and logical criticism... Such makes a huge difference.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

OK, I can agree with this. My concern is the behind-the-scenes Red counter measures that we in the Blue world may simply not be able to see. "Heidi's" first thought was his/her intention to buy ammunition; this does not bode well. Can a revival of the Michigan Militia be far behind?

I certainly share that concern.

However, I do think its acceptance as legitimate actually peaked in 2010. On the other hand, it doesn't take many to do damage though; history has shown that it can take as few as one.

Reading over those comments, while the ones you cite are there, I also saw plenty of people saying things like this:

Originally Posted by Joanne

I am beyond shocked at what happened tonight. It’s not just the Romney loss but Senate losses, and it looks like Allen West has lost and Allen Grayson has won. Michelle Bachmann barely hanging on.

Many people will blame Romney, but he’s not responsible for those losses. I can’t believe the country has gone this far left, but it appears that is the case.
This is far worse than Obama’s first win, because now people know what they are getting. I’m truly stunned at this.

The potential is there to face reality when it truly hits them over the head, I think.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

We (blue people) just have more good habits -- looking for differing views, thinking things out, not relying on pomposity as evidence of truthfulness, seeking out reliable sources, subjecting our statements to fact-checking and logical criticism... Such makes a huge difference.

I don't know. Some of us can't seem to distinguish lobbyists from dictators.

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

The potential is there to face reality when it truly hits them over the head, I think.

I heard a story of an American with a language gift traveling through Germany a few decades back. He just picks up local accents and voice inflections really well, makes friends easily, and was having a good time skiing with the locals. Just a fun trip, until he paused briefly with a local acquaintance high up on a mountain to take in the view.

"We should have killed all the Jews when we had the chance."

A lot of people will face reality if it hits them truly and squarely. Some of them won't. I guess what is important is that there be few enough denialists to not be very relevant. Let Heidi buy up all the ammunition she likes. It's harmless so long as no one has an urgent desire to pry her gun from her cold dead fingers.

Originally Posted by B Butler

I heard a story of an American with a language gift traveling through Germany a few decades back. He just picks up local accents and voice inflections really well, makes friends easily, and was having a good time skiing with the locals. Just a fun trip, until he paused briefly with a local acquaintance high up on a mountain to take in the view.

"We should have killed all the Jews when we had the chance."

A lot of people will face reality if it hits them truly and squarely. Some of them won't. I guess what is important is that there be few enough denialists to not be very relevant. Let Heidi buy up all the ammunition she likes. It's harmless so long as no one has an urgent desire to pry her gun from her cold dead fingers.

FWIW, as ine who is politically a blue with mostly red neighbors in a very red part of a redder than average state, I can see how the media propaganda feeds on delusion and prevents the grasping of reailty.
Now mind you, this year I've heard may examples of cognitive dissosanance by people who should know better manifet itself in strange ways. Amongst other things, I've heard a veteran teacher, who has benefitted from having spent a career in a teachers union make anti union statements. Now when she was a dues paying teacher, the NEA was a stalwart for quality education. Now that she's retired with a secure pension, the unions are just the last refuge for incompent education bureaucrats. I've heard a woman who proudly woirked on the McGovern '72 campaign say that she would give up on this country if Obama got re-elected. And worst of all, I know a man who was a successful engeneer before becoming a successful music director, both in hypercompetitive Manhattan, basically pining for unlimited neoconish middle eastern wars.

And yes, they are all aquarian boomers. And every one of them managed to convince themselves that not enough of Obama 2008 base would turn out to secure his second term. Just like some on this forum, they argued that the poll models showing the eventual out of the 2012 election were biased. Just like it seems is being revieled about too many so called GOP professionals, they let the stereotyppe of the lazy, welfare coillecting bum actually color their view of the opposition that they really believed that the 2012 election would be demographically like the 2010 one.

To face reality first they need to not underestimate the opposition. And as one in their opposition, I can say that personally it has not been an easy year to retain friendships.The Democrats had to go through this in the 1980's. Of course because the economic problems that Reagan faced, like inflation being driven by oil prices, was going to be fixed as the supply curve rose due to the new supplies discovered by the exploration that followd the price rises. In short, when a party loses 49 states there is no denial of a real problem. When the economics allow a losing party to be able, for now, to retain its base states denial is easier.

And I see here in redland, there is a lot of denial yet to go.

Originally Posted by herbal tee

FWIW, as ine who is politically a blue with mostly red neighbors in a very red part of a redder than average state, I can see how the media propaganda feeds on delusion and prevents the grasping of reailty.
Now mind you, this year I've heard may examples of cognitive dissosanance by people who should know better manifet itself in strange ways. Amongst other things, I've heard a veteran teacher, who has benefitted from having spent a career in a teachers union make anti union statements. Now when she was a dues paying teacher, the NEA was a stalwart for quality education. Now that she's retired with a secure pension, the unions are just the last refuge for incompent education bureaucrats. I've heard a woman who proudly woirked on the McGovern '72 campaign say that she would give up on this country if Obama got re-elected. And worst of all, I know a man who was a successful engeneer before becoming a successful music director, both in hypercompetitive Manhattan, basically pining for unlimited neoconish middle eastern wars.

And yes, they are all aquarian boomers. And every one of them managed to convince themselves that not enough of Obama 2008 base would turn out to secure his second term. Just like some on this forum, they argued that the poll models showing the eventual out of the 2012 election were biased. Just like it seems is being revieled about too many so called GOP professionals, they let the stereotyppe of the lazy, welfare coillecting bum actually color their view of the opposition that they really believed that the 2012 election would be demographically like the 2010 one.

To face reality first they need to not underestimate the opposition. And as one in their opposition, I can say that personally it has not been an easy year to retain friendships.The Democrats had to go through this in the 1980's. Of course because the economic problems that Reagan faced, like inflation being driven by oil prices, was going to be fixed as the supply curve rose due to the new supplies discovered by the exploration that followd the price rises. In short, when a party loses 49 states there is no denial of a real problem. When the economics allow a losing party to be able, for now, to retain its base states denial is easier.

And I see here in redland, there is a lot of denial yet to go.

I sit in the same weathered pew. There is an assumption in Redland that the "conservative" way is the only viable way, and this will become obvious soon ... really.

I had lunch with a guy today who feels that way, and he lives very well in very blue Maryland. At that, he feels put-upon. There is some irony there. I think we blues in Redland feel it a lot more, but it exists in some form everywhere.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

I sit in the same weathered pew. There is an assumption in Redland that the "conservative" way is the only viable way, and this will become obvious soon ... really.

Yes, but that's a fall-back position. Before this year's election, one found a belief that their ideas constituted a national majority and that only outliers and weirdos were liberal. To accept that they don't have a set of ideas that can win elections is itself a coming to grips with reality. Not to believe that it's the only viable way would amount to conceding that they're wrong, and losing an election isn't a reason to do that by itself.

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

Yes, but that's a fall-back position. Before this year's election, one found a belief that their ideas constituted a national majority and that only outliers and weirdos were liberal. To accept that they don't have a set of ideas that can win elections is itself a coming to grips with reality. Not to believe that it's the only viable way would amount to conceding that they're wrong, and losing an election isn't a reason to do that by itself.

So the GOP is not going quietly into that good night. I never thought they would. Tempermentally, they are much less the willow than the oak. They intend to stand tall and face the wind.

When the Dems went into the wilderness, it took several elections and much hand wringing. The losses to Nixon were similar to the GOP losses to Obama, but the Dems rallied and won with Carter. It was Reagan that finally moved the argument to a new plane ... where it stayed for a long time. Time's up.

So bend or break, the shift is now a virtual certainty. The Dems learned to be willows. I don't see the GOP oaks making the change.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

So the GOP is not going quietly into that good night. I never thought they would.

One must distinguish between the "conservative" movement and the Republican Party. The GOP is an organization that exists for the purpose of winning elections. There is only one other consistent (or nearly-consistent) purpose to it that can be seen from its beginnings in the 1850s until today, and that is representing the interests of the capitalist class. There are a few exceptions even to that. But it has always been an organization that seeks to win elections. If the "conservative" movement is seen as something that cannot win elections, then the Republican Party will divorce it.

So no, they're not going to die quietly; in fact, if they doubled-down forever on the "conservative" movement THAT would mean they were headed for death. I don't expect they will, and I don't expect the party to die.

What I was seeing from those comments was not the views of the Republican Party but the views of movement "conservatives" who are not politicians. If they can see the writing on the wall, so can Republican politicians and there's plenty of evidence that this is happening. It may take another presidential election walloping before they finally do accept it, but it will happen.