dagblog - Comments for "It's Not About The Right and The Left"

If it were just polls, then

Michael Wolraich — Tue, 02 Aug 2011 02:22:17 +0000

In reply to It's hard for me to believe

If it were just polls, then it would be meaningless. But these meaningless polls over labels seem to be reflected in real elections and real power. Two questions:

Why do so few people consider themselves liberal?
Why do liberals have such little power in Washington?

Are the two related? Not necessarily, but I certainly wouldn't dismiss the correspondence out of hand.

It's hard for me to believe

Dan Kervick — Mon, 01 Aug 2011 23:21:25 +0000

In reply to Just because these labels are

It's hard for me to believe that these labels have much remaining meaning when they are self-applied throughout the Democratic Party in a manner that is not that far from a purely random distribution. That suggests to me they are just left-over, loosely pinned identity tags from some earlier convention of the dead, that have survived into an intellectually decadent and incoherent present.

In any case, this kind of process-obsession and compulsive poll-watching and temperature taking of the body politic is a self-reinforcing phenomenon that has bequeathed us a Democratic Party run by vapid political professionals without any pronounced moral core or discernable agenda. Thus we are given the spectacle of the sad empty shell named "Barack Obama", who has seemingly tried to build an entire personal religion out of being as inoffensive and agreeable as possible, attempting to navigate through the turbulent waters of a budget debate without any clear sense of where he is trying to end up.

You can't even hate the man, since he is just so pathetically lost and feeble. Has ever a politician been so tragically wedded to the security blankets of the status quo, and so determined to make sure that nothing he does sticks out as the least bit dangerous or challenging? Ironically, even his strategy of extreme safety doesn't work, because people end up being offended by his vanilla nothingness.

We need to have a serious and contentious debate in the Democratic Party over the next year, hopefully sparked by a passionate challenger for the nomination, so that Obama's nihilistic conservatism can at least be forced to square up against people with some kind of heart and real commitment.

Just because these labels are

Elusive Trope — Mon, 01 Aug 2011 20:35:35 +0000

In reply to It seems to me that you are

Just because these labels are not perfect, doesn't mean they have no value. The current debate/fight going on in DC has to do with the role of government. One can reasonably make the assertion that the conservative view on the role of government is that it should be very very small (with conservatives bickering amongst themselves as to how small), whereas the liberal view see a large role for government. If someone calls themselves a liberal, chances are they are for a new stimulus package. A conservative one could bet is against a new stimulus package. Liberals are more it takes a village and conservatives are more pulling themselves up by their bootstraps.

I could on and on providing examples. There are also certain issues and policies that crosses this particular division of ideology. But in the end there are some generally accepted notions about liberalism and conservativism in this country.

(And one can find stupid, mushy thinking under the heading of any political ideological slant. Just as one can find astute and clear thinking.)

Describing the political slants and views of a nation as large and diverse as America is an inexact science mixed with an elements of the arts. It won't ever be perfect. A poll such as the gallup's is not the only tool one uses. It is one of a whole shed full of tools one uses to get a sense and understanding of where people are at in their perceptions of themselves (and also their sense of terms such as liberal).

Of course, one can not engage in such political speculation (and yes that is all it is, speculation based on the various data which has varying degrees of accuracy) and call it all about nothing. And of course, such a person might not find much interest at a place such as Dagblog.

It seems to me that you are

Dan Kervick — Mon, 01 Aug 2011 20:04:18 +0000

In reply to They pretty much mean what

It seems to me that you are just demonstrating that these labels "mean" absolutely nothing. You say you know some people who call themselves liberal, but are "actually" conservative. In what sense? In your own private idiolectical sense of "conservative". I could just as well say that someone who is a staunch defender of laissez faire government is actually a liberal. Many people have come to hate the word "liberal" because it is a stupid, mushy word connoting stupid, mushy thinking.

They pretty much mean what

Elusive Trope — Mon, 01 Aug 2011 19:58:03 +0000

In reply to None of the above. Some

They pretty much mean what they have always meant - some rough ballparky idea of where people perceive themselves to be. If some liberal hates the word liberal enough to call themselves conservative, then a politician with the brand of liberal on him or her will have a harder time getting their vote, etc.

I know a few people who like to say they are liberal, but when one gets them talking on issues from gay marriage to foreign policy, they are actually quite conservative. So there is probably some balancing out of the "conservative" who is really liberal phenomenon.

So the question: Lincoln Chaffee a liberal or a conservative?

I suppose one runs down all the lists of policy positions - environment, foreign policy, education, economic stimulus package, etc etc, and if one tends to generally agree with the liberals, then one is a liberal, agree with the conservatives mainly, then conservative.

Of course a very conservative individual can be pro-life based on religious beliefs or pro-choice from a strictly libertarian stance. So the labels in the end don't say how people feel about particular policies or legislation. But without some broad labels such as these, one cannot make any broad, general assertion about the nation. And yet we see the nation as particular entity, made up smaller, overlapping entities, and is itself part of larger entities. And so on. There is no label for groups and subgroups the size we are talking about where they will be perfectly descriptive. Even any two Socialist Democrats can differ greatly on any particular issue.

None of the above. Some

Dan Kervick — Mon, 01 Aug 2011 19:42:51 +0000

In reply to Those first two were not

None of the above.

Some people would choose one of the labels. But the fact that people are being forced by the political punditocracy to insert themselves into silly, out-of-date pigeon holes is one reason why we have such a poor understanding of what people think.

I have two friends who would both probably describe themselves as "very conservative" but who think we should be sending more Wall-Streeters to jail and taxing away giant financial sector salaries. Go figure. A lot of people call themselves "conservative" because they hate liberals, and "liberal" is for them synonymous with "upper-class elitist". So what do these labels mean any more?

Those first two were not

Elusive Trope — Mon, 01 Aug 2011 18:41:01 +0000

In reply to I would identify myself as

Those first two were not options in the poll. If you had to choose between 'very conservative,' 'conservative,' 'moderate,' 'liberal,' or 'very liberal,' which one would you choose.

I would identify myself as

Dan Kervick — Mon, 01 Aug 2011 18:21:29 +0000

In reply to Today's new Gallup poll gives

I would identify myself as either a social democrat or a democratic socialist - but not a liberal.

Good point about tea-baggers

Beetlejuice — Mon, 01 Aug 2011 15:48:47 +0000

In reply to Excellent point about her

Good point about tea-baggers and the left.

Tea-baggers put the effort out to be heard in both primary and general election and now command a seat at the table. Whereas, liberals put their faith in their elected officials are are dismayed when they don't live up to the left's expectations. Because they don't have a point-of-presence in Washington they're easily dismissed.

Today's new Gallup poll gives

Elusive Trope — Mon, 01 Aug 2011 14:09:59 +0000

In reply to Excellent point about her

Today's new Gallup poll gives an indication as to why this path to a seat at the table is so difficult:

Among Democrats, twice as many identify themselves as conservative (18%) than those who identify themselves as very liberal (9%). On the flip side with the Republicans, seven times as many identify themselves as very conservative (21%) as opposed to those who identify themselves as liberal (3%).