TNR online: THE CASE FOR NATIONAL GREATNESS LIBERALISM.

[whometense]

by Noam Scheiber http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20051024&s=trb102405

Schreiber thinks this is unfortunate - me? Not so much.

In 1989, political scientists Bill Galston and Elaine Kamarck wrote a paper called "The Politics of Evasion," in which they argued that Democrats were too far to the left on social and economic issues to be competitive nationally. The paper's bluntness helped provoke a nasty fight between the party's moderates and liberals. But that fight produced the presidential candidacy of Bill Clinton, probably the best thing to happen to Democrats in a generation.

Last week, Galston and Kamarck released another paper shrewdly assessing the obstacles standing between Democrats and majority status. It's a self-conscious attempt to reproduce the effects of their 1989 paper. But the unfortunate truth is that moderate Democrats face much longer odds than they did 16 years ago.

Galston and Kamarck's basic idea is that each party has become much more ideologically homogenous over the last few election cycles, with conservatives voting overwhelmingly Republican and liberals overwhelmingly Democratic. Whereas Jimmy Carter won 29 percent of self-identified conservative voters in 1976, John Kerry won only 15 percent last year. Conversely, Carter only won 72 percent of liberals versus Kerry's 85. Galston and Kamarck aptly refer to this trend as "the great sorting-out." ...

...What moderates need to recognize is that the party's problem is both deeper and more solvable than they realize. Deeper because the hostility of liberals toward moderates now transcends any particular issue; it has to do with their entire approach to politics, which liberals believe is craven. But the problem is more solvable because liberals are more pragmatic than moderates assume: They may be open to more conservative positions on certain issues, such as the war on terrorism, as long as they feel like moderates are standing up for something, not needlessly selling out core Democratic principles. (For example, Harry Reid is popular among liberals despite being pro-life, skeptical of gun control, and having voted for the war.) Striking this balance obviously won't be painless--I'm personally a die-hard free-trader. But the one way to ensure that things get a lot worse for Democrats is to pretend that no balance needs to be struck.

[blm]

1. The biggest factor since 89 is that the GOP now controls most broadcast

media and 80% of the electronic voting machines, their input and their output.

Why the FOCK doesn't any strategist factor those enormous points in to their equations?

[whometense]

2. Excellent question.

Answer: Because if we put our fingers in our ears and sing loudly while you're talking to us you can't make us think about anything we don't want to think about.

Seriously, it does seem like those problems are just too much hard work to address, and besides, addressing them means admitting some uncomfortable truths about our country. I'm not sure our strategists are up to the challenge.

Don't mean to be so cynical, but most of these people appear to have their heads up their asses, and in particular almost anyone who writes for TNR. It's gonna take a long time before I forgive their attitude towards Kerry in 2003-2005. They just tried to pretend he didn't exist, and when forced to acknowledge his existence they mocked him. My husband has a subscription, and you could have made an amusing film of watching me pick up each issue, lookat what they wrote about Kerry, and then throw the thing to the ground in disgust. Every freakin' week.

Except for one article written by Franklin Foer about Kerry's youth that was quite good.

[beachmom]

3. Anyone see that movie "Shattered Glass" about TNR?

Anakin Skywalker from the Star War movies stars as Stephen Glass, the guy who just made stuff up and printed it in TNR, a huge scandal in 1998. I really enjoyed the film, but you can see why they are often clueless, as they are stuck in their own world of self-importance.

Not sure what I feel about the article. Based on the Chavez thread, we Kerry supporters alone are a VERY diverse group with different views. But it is true, that I can no longer vote Republican, because I find their views too extreme. So in that sense I have become a more homogeneous Democrat.

[TayTay]

4. I saw there was an article in The American Prospect

that called TNR out on their ridiculous flat tax story of a couple of months ago. TNR is becoming more neo-con by the day. I don't agree with their Iraq policy and with their tax policy.

I understand being moderate, but these guys hate everything Dems do. No wonder they are losing circulation while The Nation and other more lib (or mod-lib) publications are picking up support.