The democrats are still in denial, endlessly citing the popular vote as proof Trump is illegitimate. The problem seems to be they do not understand what the republic is, and have no use for the founding principles that formed this country. When Thomas Jefferson stated all men are created equal, endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights (Natural Law), and that the duty of government was to protect those rights, that is the basis of our country. The electoral college, which is the basis for our representative democracy( the republic), has worked to perfection. It was set up to keep New York City from running the entire country by virtue of having more people living there. State rights, state sovereignty, and the tenth amendment, are all in direct opposition to the progressive agenda which failed in this election. Article 5 of the constitution lays out clearly how the people can change their government, without congress, the president, or the courts. Term limits is the logical next step in the process of Draining the Swamp, which is going to have to be done by the people themselves. I read these comments from New Yorker's and wonder what planet they are on. They are so out of touch with the rest of the country it is pathetic, and the force feeding of this ideology to the rest of the country is being rejected whole cloth at the local level. My advice is to keep pushing your agenda liberals, it will ensure you will lose every election going forward.
64
The Democrats have been moving right ever since Bill Clinton, and it has not helped them. They have lost because they have abandoned the working people and gotten into bed with those who can enrich them the most. Mayors like Emanuel have embraced charter schools and antagonized unions. Obama failed to prosecute anyone connected to the 08 crash and pursued trade deals that the people didn't want. Bill Clinton and Gingrich cut a deal to privatize Social Security that only failed to happen because of the Lewinsky debacle. Federal prosecution for white collar crime is at a 20 year low and the frauds of robosigning went unpunished. When Democrats return to their traditional roots and start supporting the middle class, prosecuting wrongdoers, and doing something about the huge inequities that exist between rich and poor, they will start winning again. And they won't have to do it by gerrymandering or suppressing the vote like the Republicans.
391
Ross's argument falters on "conservative religious schools". Public funding of "religious schools" is an "establishment of religion", banned by the First Amendment. (In legal history and in the context of the framing of the U.S. Constitution, a government establishes religion when it supports it with public money.) The so-called right wants to promote public funding of private (including religious) schools at the expense of public education, and then call it "choice". That is neither conservative nor constitutional.
124
The Democrats made the right hand turn in the 90's when they elected Clinton. It has been a disaster. Time to return to the principles that made the Democratic party great. Economic justice for all.
155
I don't know whether it's a function of being too young or too ideologically straightjacketed, but Mr. Douthat's notion that the Democratic Party can be helped by moving right is almost bizarre. There is little daylight between the Democratic Party--even President Obama and Secretary Clinton--and positions that have been mainstream center-right Republicanism for most of my six decades on earth. Democrats now occupy the center-right of the spectrum (and even further right by European standards) and the Republican party has been taken over by fringe elements to such an extent that even neo-Nazis and the KKK are fellow-travelers.
186
"Stiff upper lip?" How about walking quietly with a big stick?The current President has been overseeing a global omnipresent drone killing program conducted by the military and the state department for the last eight years.
Don't confuse quiet resolve with spineless.
Don't confuse quiet resolve with spineless.
28
Bill Clinton became president by moving to the right. Barak Obama has governed to the right of Richard Nixon. Moving to the right has only caused Republicans to become only ever more reactionary. Moving to the right has allowed "market forces" to create the greatest wealth gap in our history. Moving right gave us our second Great Depression, euphemistically called the "Great Recession" because things didn't get quite as bad ... unless you were on the receiving end of the stick. Moving right now will only empower Donald Trump and his racist, misogynistic, xenophobic followers and make the many poorer so that the rich can become even more rich. Why would any opposition party in it's (collective) right mind move further to the right? Instead, the Democrats should clearly, distinctly and in simple basic terms explain what they can do for the common man. They should not fall into the trap of exclaiming over each outrageous thing Donald Trump does, but keep hammering home on their very consistent message: here's how we'll do better.
267
Good grief, I hope not! Democrats need to develop backbone for the principles for which Democrats stand for! So far, most of them have been jelly-spined and have not had much influence on government! I know I am very close to reregistering as an Independent and let the Democratic Party go to that very hot and dark place to match the invisibility they have had for a long time now.
77
How come when Democrats win we are urged to seek out common ground with Republicans. There were such calls for Clinton before Trump's win shocked the world. But now that Democrats have lost, it is us who are urged to move right instead of calling on Trump to work with Democrats who received more than 2 millions votes than the electoral college winner. Funny how calls to compromise are always directed at us.
115
Mr. Douthat:
So, in your not-so humble opinion, the way to back up your self-declared principled stance against Trumpism, is to cave in to the ignorance that caused it? It didn't take you long to start talking out of both sides of your mouth. A week before the election you wrote a similar column about the Republican party.
Why is it that I don't feel any sincerity in your wholly unwanted advice fot the Democratic party? Shouldn't you be writing about how to control a Trump
presidency run amok? How about those cabinet picks so far? Not a problem
from your principled perspsective?
We don't need a party of conservative-lite, which is what you propose here.
We need a principled stance against lunacy, which is what you promised th uphold a mere two weeks ago.. Hypocracy may be a living, it is not a solution to our problems.
So, in your not-so humble opinion, the way to back up your self-declared principled stance against Trumpism, is to cave in to the ignorance that caused it? It didn't take you long to start talking out of both sides of your mouth. A week before the election you wrote a similar column about the Republican party.
Why is it that I don't feel any sincerity in your wholly unwanted advice fot the Democratic party? Shouldn't you be writing about how to control a Trump
presidency run amok? How about those cabinet picks so far? Not a problem
from your principled perspsective?
We don't need a party of conservative-lite, which is what you propose here.
We need a principled stance against lunacy, which is what you promised th uphold a mere two weeks ago.. Hypocracy may be a living, it is not a solution to our problems.
102
The Democrats have already moved to the right - as we all have been forced to do over the past 40 years. How do explain the success of Bill Clinton who ran and succeeded with a number of what were then Republican issues. Same with Barack Obama who is one of the more conservative Presidents in modern times. Obama continued Bushes war in the Middle East - a republican initiative. Obama kept Guantanamo open - a republican initiative. Obama failed to prosecute one single banker or wall street executive for the crimes they committed to crash our economy - definitely a conservative success! So yes - the Democrats can move to the right. They've been doing it for decades. How far can you push them before the fault lines break?
54
Ross, I really hate it when your right.
21
The reason the Democrats lost is due to none of the factors Ross identifies, and most Democrats view the policy changes he suggests.
Republicans win because they use counterfactual propaganda relentlessly, and Democrats for the most part eschew it. Romney lost because he tried to run on reason like a Democrat, and Hillary lost because she did nothing to counter Trump's massively effective propaganda machine.
Ross needs to understand that for Democrats most of what he is suggesting amounts to a move from Good to Evil. The minds of intellectual ethicists like Douthat and Brooks would be better applied to understanding why the right and the left have such wildly different views on THAT dichotomy.
Republicans win because they use counterfactual propaganda relentlessly, and Democrats for the most part eschew it. Romney lost because he tried to run on reason like a Democrat, and Hillary lost because she did nothing to counter Trump's massively effective propaganda machine.
Ross needs to understand that for Democrats most of what he is suggesting amounts to a move from Good to Evil. The minds of intellectual ethicists like Douthat and Brooks would be better applied to understanding why the right and the left have such wildly different views on THAT dichotomy.
64
First of all, "ask" is a verb not a noun.
Second, Trump's campaign was no substance, all identity politics: specifically dividing identities against one another.
Third, the Republican surge at the state and national level has coincided with nothing other than their desperation to gerrymander and ID-law their way into power. Without those gimmicks, they're in a vastly diminished position.
Bernie Sanders and The Donald demonstrated that people of all stripes have realized that the power structure isn't working for them. They want the swamp drained. The problem is that thanks to an inept DNC and the Electoral College, we just elected a guy who a lot of people thought would be a ruthless Drainer In Chief, but who's just a corrupt buffoon.
Second, Trump's campaign was no substance, all identity politics: specifically dividing identities against one another.
Third, the Republican surge at the state and national level has coincided with nothing other than their desperation to gerrymander and ID-law their way into power. Without those gimmicks, they're in a vastly diminished position.
Bernie Sanders and The Donald demonstrated that people of all stripes have realized that the power structure isn't working for them. They want the swamp drained. The problem is that thanks to an inept DNC and the Electoral College, we just elected a guy who a lot of people thought would be a ruthless Drainer In Chief, but who's just a corrupt buffoon.
68
Sometimes a move to the center is warranted, but in this case, the Democrats weren't left enough. Remember, Clinton won the popular vote, but lost in important blue-collar states. Bernie Sanders, not too far to the right, likely would have won those voters, who weren't fond of Trump. The issue was jobs, and Clinton did not address that issue well.
49
With all due respect Mr. Douhat, I don't think it has anything to do with right or left. In my view it has more to do with the integrity of the candidate. Polls indicated that Bernie Sanders would have defeated Trump. He was much further left that Trump or HRC but seemingly more honest and transparent. I am an independent anti war voter and would have voted for Sanders had he been the Democratic candidate. I voted for neither and unapologetically sat this one out.
72
Typical drivel from Douthat.
It's always the same with these Republicans - i.e., Democrats would be fine if they just "compromised" by becoming Republicans.
And he of course has to throw in a couple of complete 'straw men' - are there any mainstream Democrats that are for "open borders", or "mass refugee resettlement"....?
The answer of course is No. Those phrases are simply caricatures designed to alarm and fear.
Everything with these republicans is predicated on one thing - there are 'Real Americans (TM)' by which they mean White, Older, Rural & Republican-voting, and then there's everyone else.
Pandering to 'Real Americans (TM)' is of course perfectly OK, but pandering to (aka addressing the concerns of) anyone else is the death of the Republic.
It's always the same with these Republicans - i.e., Democrats would be fine if they just "compromised" by becoming Republicans.
And he of course has to throw in a couple of complete 'straw men' - are there any mainstream Democrats that are for "open borders", or "mass refugee resettlement"....?
The answer of course is No. Those phrases are simply caricatures designed to alarm and fear.
Everything with these republicans is predicated on one thing - there are 'Real Americans (TM)' by which they mean White, Older, Rural & Republican-voting, and then there's everyone else.
Pandering to 'Real Americans (TM)' is of course perfectly OK, but pandering to (aka addressing the concerns of) anyone else is the death of the Republic.
71
Almost every other commenter here has said it all better than I could. I'd rather not even dignify Douthat's Orwellian column by responding to it, other than to say that the country's grotesque economic inequality is the source of our social troubles. Douthat, the NY Times, and the Democratic establishment want to distract us from it by focusing on immigration, restroom choice, and refugee resettlement, which are easier problems to address.
Let's get real: the mobilization of the American working class is a threat to the owners and publishers of the NY Times, the corporate Democrats, the "Douthatists", and anyone to their right.
Let's get real: the mobilization of the American working class is a threat to the owners and publishers of the NY Times, the corporate Democrats, the "Douthatists", and anyone to their right.
43
The question should be will the Democrats move to the right? The party of John F. Kennedy has moved so far leftward that it is frightening. He would not recognize his party today and would probably be a a moderate Republican.
If the Democrats continue their left-wing progressive position they will lose even more voters in the next presidential election. The Republicans won both the house and senate seats in 2016 for a good reason. The people had had enough of the liberalism from the Obama years and wanted a change. They wanted to make America great again and not continue its downward spiral.
The Democrats better start listening to the people or they are doomed. They should have learned their lesson from this past election.
If the Democrats continue their left-wing progressive position they will lose even more voters in the next presidential election. The Republicans won both the house and senate seats in 2016 for a good reason. The people had had enough of the liberalism from the Obama years and wanted a change. They wanted to make America great again and not continue its downward spiral.
The Democrats better start listening to the people or they are doomed. They should have learned their lesson from this past election.
20
Many positions that Douthat suggests are reasonable and consistent with the thinking of Democratic voters and leaders. The problem here (and in many political discussions) is the false symmetry between the Democratic left and the Republican right. Mr. Trump and the Tea Party have called for things unthinkable in modern America: registries of people of a certain religion, mass deportations and a deportation force, a nod to nuclear proliferation, and, from the Tea Party, a radical program that would eliminate the New Deal and the Progressive era. What Mr. Douthat describes at the end as the current Democratic agenda is nonsense: open borders, desexed bathrooms, guaranteed income, and mass refugee resettlement. Democrats are not calling for open borders, they are calling for normalization of the status of people working here and contributing to our economy for years. Nor are they calling for desexed bathrooms, a fear-mongering characterization. Transgender people are probably often using, today, the bathroom of the gender with which they identity, and no one is any the wiser. There is a huge difference between wide support for a higher minimum wage for hard working people (largely opposed by Republicans) and supposed advocacy of guaranteed income. Nor is anyone (except Trump with his misleading rhetoric) proposing "mass refugee resettlement". These false characterizations are designed to make the true radicalism of contemporary Republicans appear normal.
140
First the pundits tell us the Republican party is going to implode. Then the pundits told us Clinton would win and perhaps in a landslide. Now the pundits are telling us the Democrats are in crisis and need to move to the right. It's all just baloney. They haven't a clue.
48
Please ask your columnist J. D. Vance how we should restructure welfare. He knows what makes Springfield, Ohio's working people so angry about how they see its benefits used, now. The problem I see with attaching welfare to work is that "work" can consist of part-time shifts at two or three fast food places. For people to participate in the dignity of work, work has to have dignity. Democratic party thinkers should wrap their heads around THIS problem.
And how to deal with the fact that slavery has ended but its legacy hasn't? Whites -- poor and otherwise -- suffer from 400 years of belief that "things may be bad, but at least I'm not Black". Slavery in our history taught people to value this "truth". We need a political party to acknowledge that whites have been ill-served by slavery in this way. We need leadership that helps us -- whites and people of color -- to reconcile and to move on.
And how to deal with the fact that slavery has ended but its legacy hasn't? Whites -- poor and otherwise -- suffer from 400 years of belief that "things may be bad, but at least I'm not Black". Slavery in our history taught people to value this "truth". We need a political party to acknowledge that whites have been ill-served by slavery in this way. We need leadership that helps us -- whites and people of color -- to reconcile and to move on.
16
The screamingly obvious counter to this disingenuous argument is that the Republicans, after getting crushed in 2006 and 2008, didn't exactly moderate their views. Quite the opposite, in fact. And now they control everything.
Putting aside the media's role in legitimizing a man whose career thru-lines were serial fraud, sexual assault and authoritarian fetishism, I think the Democrats lost (or "lost") this year in large part due to a presidential candidate whom the electorate--unfairly in my opinion, but no matter--simply did not like, and in smaller part due to muddled messaging. A large set of detailed and thoughtful policy papers doesn't amount to a story--as President Obama knew, but Sec. Clinton seemingly did not.
This can be fixed without surrendering the soul of the party, or further demotivating a rank and file already on the verge of chugging bleach as we think about the next four years.
Putting aside the media's role in legitimizing a man whose career thru-lines were serial fraud, sexual assault and authoritarian fetishism, I think the Democrats lost (or "lost") this year in large part due to a presidential candidate whom the electorate--unfairly in my opinion, but no matter--simply did not like, and in smaller part due to muddled messaging. A large set of detailed and thoughtful policy papers doesn't amount to a story--as President Obama knew, but Sec. Clinton seemingly did not.
This can be fixed without surrendering the soul of the party, or further demotivating a rank and file already on the verge of chugging bleach as we think about the next four years.
34
As the Republican party should move a little to the left. My parents' views have not changed in 60+ years and they have gone from being conservative to being fairly liberal. They have been Republicans since they were eligible to vote, and until very recently had only voted for Republicans in national elections.
My parents don't understand why we don't want the smartest people in government, why we shouldn't be paying more in taxes for better roads, schools and education, why not everyone has access to decent and affordable healthcare and a woman's right to choose. Yes, an elderly couple believes in the right to choose, maybe because they lived through the alternative?
They were republicans when under Eisenhower, when the tax rates for the very rich were very high. They don't see why that has changed, since it apparently has only benefited the super rich. Things have changed a lot in their lifetime, and not all for the better. And recently, my father said, he was glad it was likely his last election, because he could not believe how low it has all sunk.
My parents don't understand why we don't want the smartest people in government, why we shouldn't be paying more in taxes for better roads, schools and education, why not everyone has access to decent and affordable healthcare and a woman's right to choose. Yes, an elderly couple believes in the right to choose, maybe because they lived through the alternative?
They were republicans when under Eisenhower, when the tax rates for the very rich were very high. They don't see why that has changed, since it apparently has only benefited the super rich. Things have changed a lot in their lifetime, and not all for the better. And recently, my father said, he was glad it was likely his last election, because he could not believe how low it has all sunk.
179
The Democrats lost the electoral college because of trade policy, where Trump outflanked Hillary to the left. Without that, the deciding Midwestern states would not have flipped. Based on what happened in this election, the question is whether the Democrats will embrace Bernie-style left-wing populism to capture the votes they lost, not whether they will move rightward and end up even further adrift politically. This piece is completely delusional.
26
Oh, Ross, if only American politics were actually about public policy, you might have a point.
This is the same country that elected Obama in a landslide, twice, and denied Hillary, Kerry and Gore the presidency, narrowly. Two of the three Democratic losers actually got the most votes.
The lesson, of course, is that personality and charisma matters. All four Democratic candidates turned out reliable Democratic voters. These voters would vote for a ham sandwich if that's what the Democrats nominated. But Barack Obama was different - he activated a large number of unreliable voters in the Democratic coalition, and so he won by landslides. How did Barack do this where the other 3 failed? He did it by emerging as the non-establishment choice. He won extremely narrowly, taking everyone by surprise, racking up delegates in small state caucuses. The three losers, by contrast, were the anointed choices of the establishment elite, preordained and presumptive nominees from the beginning. Anti-establishment candidates were crushed - Bradley, Kane and Sanders.
All Democrats need to do, is to understand that to win nationally, they need to cede the nominee selection to the anti-establishment, unreliable wing of the Democratic coalition. This group may choose foolishly, but if we can agree that a ham sandwich is preferable to Trump or Bush, then take Al Davis' advice: Just Win, Baby. That means going with the anti-establishment's charismatic choice.
This is the same country that elected Obama in a landslide, twice, and denied Hillary, Kerry and Gore the presidency, narrowly. Two of the three Democratic losers actually got the most votes.
The lesson, of course, is that personality and charisma matters. All four Democratic candidates turned out reliable Democratic voters. These voters would vote for a ham sandwich if that's what the Democrats nominated. But Barack Obama was different - he activated a large number of unreliable voters in the Democratic coalition, and so he won by landslides. How did Barack do this where the other 3 failed? He did it by emerging as the non-establishment choice. He won extremely narrowly, taking everyone by surprise, racking up delegates in small state caucuses. The three losers, by contrast, were the anointed choices of the establishment elite, preordained and presumptive nominees from the beginning. Anti-establishment candidates were crushed - Bradley, Kane and Sanders.
All Democrats need to do, is to understand that to win nationally, they need to cede the nominee selection to the anti-establishment, unreliable wing of the Democratic coalition. This group may choose foolishly, but if we can agree that a ham sandwich is preferable to Trump or Bush, then take Al Davis' advice: Just Win, Baby. That means going with the anti-establishment's charismatic choice.
9
We mustn't forget that Democratic candidates won more total votes in Congress back in 2012, but still couldn't retake the House because of all the gerrymandering perpetrated by the GOP in 2010. That's the main reason their presence in the House, and at the state level, has been diminished. The Republicans were very smart about cheating to win. But that doesn't make their technical dominance right.
7
I agree that the Democrats lost a large portion of the population because of recent gains in minority rights, sexual rights and immigration issues. Moving a tad to the right - if that just means speaking to middle-America - would help. We also have to get on the populist wave before it crests. Income inequality is ever increasing, and it will bring an earthquake of some type before long.
6
an issue is the republican party has been moving to the far right for years... way past the center-right 'compassionate conservatism' of George W. Bush, who expanded Medicare benefits. Does that mean the democrats should become eisenhower republicans??
3
Yep, Ross. The Dems HAVE to do something, because people of your ilk ("journalists") have been stating that the Dems were destroyed in this election. So, I guess winning the popular vote by (potentially) 2.5M votes; picking up a seat in the Senate, and 5-6 seats in the House is getting "destroyed". The problem, Ross, is an antiquated electoral system that was originally devised to give slave-holders more political power, coupled with an exceptionally effective redistricting efforts carried out by the Republican Party after the 2010 elections. The result is having a party in power that is hated by over half the country. As a conservative, I'm sure you're happy - for now. But you should feel troubled for the long-term prospects of your Republican Party. It would be in the best interest of the party to govern responsibly, accepting that most of the people voted for Democrats. But, just like the republican party of elections past, they'll pretend to have a mandate after the election and endeavor to push an agenda that is not supported by 3/4 of the country. Again, Ross: You may be overjoyed at the position the repubs are in right now, but I'd temper that glee with a little reality based on recent political history, and future political (and demographic) realities.
7
I don't know that a shift left or right is the answer. The Democrats are easily dismissed as a party of empty gestures and social issues. If they want to be given the job of governing, they have to have a plan to improve governance. Not simply expand governance, which is not popular. Rather the Democrats need to find ways of making government more productive, to give the people more for less. That would mean taking on public sector unions, but doing so would also improve the party's image. The party is currently stuck with the image that it would rather keep government as it is, to please the civil servants, than change it to please the people. That makes the chaotic rollout of Obamacare, for instance, all the more damaging for the party.
6
Democrats haven't been moving left so much as Republicans have been moving rightward ever since Reagan. Clinton won because he adopted some conservative ideas, such as a hard-line on crime and welfare-to-work "reform." Both policies hit minorities, who Republicans hate, especially hard. Both have been disasters.
Republicans dominate statehouses and now the federal government due to decades of gerrymandering and right-wing propaganda. If you look at Republican-dominated states, they are failing in many ways: education, income, jobs. Compare Republican Wisconsin, Kansas, Kentucky and Louisiana to Democratic California. The Republican states are struggling, while California has become a model for what progressive government can achieve.
Republican ideology can be summed up minimal government with a big military that does very little for those in need. Christianity dominates, and there is no separation of Church and State. Whites rule.
Democrats know that only government can create a truly just society that cares of and helps all citizens.
The gap is so wide it's not even close.
Republicans dominate statehouses and now the federal government due to decades of gerrymandering and right-wing propaganda. If you look at Republican-dominated states, they are failing in many ways: education, income, jobs. Compare Republican Wisconsin, Kansas, Kentucky and Louisiana to Democratic California. The Republican states are struggling, while California has become a model for what progressive government can achieve.
Republican ideology can be summed up minimal government with a big military that does very little for those in need. Christianity dominates, and there is no separation of Church and State. Whites rule.
Democrats know that only government can create a truly just society that cares of and helps all citizens.
The gap is so wide it's not even close.
10
How soon Ross forgets. A month ago he, Mr. Brooks, and all the right-wing pundits at the Washington Post were all but primal screaming "Vote for Hillary!"
Now he's right back to proselytizing for dropping separation of church and state from the First Amendment.
Now he's right back to proselytizing for dropping separation of church and state from the First Amendment.
7
The more apt question is this: Can the Republicans move left? The majority of Americans who voted, voted for Hillary Clinton. 80% of us think abortion should be legal, the ACA is popular even among those who voted for DT, a majority of even NRA members think some form of reasonable gun control is needed, and most people in the US think that excessive CEO pay needs stop. But no, it's the moderate majority of the people who Douthat wants to move to the radical minority called Republicans. He could use a reality check.
13
There is only one area where dems have moved further to the left over the years, and that is gay and transgender rights (and...this is not a bad thing). In every other area dems have moved further to the right. Hillary was basically a centrist Republican candidate. Concentration and power of wealth in corporate hands is worse than it ever was; is this not the major issue? Or maybe pollution and climate change is the major issue? In any case you are asking people in a burning building to turn up the heat.
14
My first instinct is always to respond to nonsense with sarcasm but right now inflaming passions should not be high on the agenda.
I am a non believer who views the bible as great literature and as all truly great literature it is timeless.
This is not a political story this is a human story and we have seen it many times before. The bible tells this story very well it is the story of the Exodus from Egypt. That was America's story. America was an escape from the colonial Empires of Egypt and a search for the Promised Land.
It is 2016 and Korach has been elected leader and has vowed to lead us back to Egypt. Like Moses of old Clinton had a speak defect and could not tell us where we are going. Like Korach of old Trump description of Egypt was his story not our story. We were slaves in Egypt, we will be slaves when we return.
I am a non believer who views the bible as great literature and as all truly great literature it is timeless.
This is not a political story this is a human story and we have seen it many times before. The bible tells this story very well it is the story of the Exodus from Egypt. That was America's story. America was an escape from the colonial Empires of Egypt and a search for the Promised Land.
It is 2016 and Korach has been elected leader and has vowed to lead us back to Egypt. Like Moses of old Clinton had a speak defect and could not tell us where we are going. Like Korach of old Trump description of Egypt was his story not our story. We were slaves in Egypt, we will be slaves when we return.
5
The most interesting question is one that Mr. Douthat does not raise explicitly. That is: does the Democratic Party modify its ideology, its positions, because the party sees that these changes will make this a better country? Or are these suggestions for modifying long-held positions simply pandering for votes in the next election? I get the sense that Mr. Douthat's recommendations are much like the Republican's famous autopsy a few elections ago. That definitely was a document that pandered, ranther than expressed true ideological change in the GOP. Strangely enough, it was ignored, and Trump won anyway--calling himself a Republican.
As a lifelong Democrat, I favor the first alternative. I believe the Democrats need to move away from the extremist, headline positions and work as a group to address those issues that make sense to the majority of the nation. Everyone knows and knew that the ACA, Welfare, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid need to be addressed. I, for one, would vote for any person or party that addressed any or all of these third-rail issues openly and honestly and proposed alternative solutions for long-term fixes or improvements.
As a lifelong Democrat, I favor the first alternative. I believe the Democrats need to move away from the extremist, headline positions and work as a group to address those issues that make sense to the majority of the nation. Everyone knows and knew that the ACA, Welfare, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid need to be addressed. I, for one, would vote for any person or party that addressed any or all of these third-rail issues openly and honestly and proposed alternative solutions for long-term fixes or improvements.
5
The Democrats became a center-right party with Bill Clinton and that hasn't stopped.
The only rationale for moving further right is the Electoral College which is preparing to anoint a spectacularly ill-equipped man as President.
Douthat wants us to cater to the ill informed, nationalist, racist group that just gave us Trump and in the last few years has given us a GOP Congress that proudly refused to even carry out its duties.
Some advice.
The only rationale for moving further right is the Electoral College which is preparing to anoint a spectacularly ill-equipped man as President.
Douthat wants us to cater to the ill informed, nationalist, racist group that just gave us Trump and in the last few years has given us a GOP Congress that proudly refused to even carry out its duties.
Some advice.
5
Mr. Douthat prescription for the Democratic Party is misguided and will change the party at best as center right one. The Democratic Party should embrace the mantle of providing policies to narrow the income gap between of the 5% high income and wealthy and the rest of 95%. This should be done with guaranteed income for workers who loose their jobs due as results of technological advancements, and trade policies, to have more progressive taxation policies and subsidies for education and training. Democratic Party should continue to support and defend women's right including access to abortion and contraception, It should strive to change justice system so that every citizen has equal right under the law and reduce drastically the prison population. It should ensure that every citizen voting right to vote is protected. It should work hard to have non-profit health care system for all American. It should defend and promote sensible regulations and environmental policies. The Democratic Party tent should be large and include all progressive who share most of these worthy causes.
6
In it’s philosophical analysis this is an accurate and laudable commentary.
It is apparent however that Ross does not attend Democratic party meetings. If he did he would find that an ongoing spiraling into a tighter and tighter funnel of leftist orthodoxy is attributable to the charter of the Dem party.
The party right now mandates an equal division of delegates on a male and female ratio. In addition to that preferences must be given to so called minorities such as blacks, gays and so forth. As a one time very active white male Dem it was demoralizing to see the preferential treatment given these groups.
I recall being ostracized for questioning gays or women having combat roles side by side heterosexual male troops. My point was not that they couldn’t win that battle, or that it might with effort be workable but what would be the price. Eventually I saw less and less white males being active who favored practical over ideological positions.
It was that slight skewing of the party that thus led to Hillary by coronation.
I approached the ACLU on the issue of quotas and the fact that within the Dem. party any support shown for any Republican automatically bans you being a delegate for 2 years. This even if your community were to elect you. Thus another tool for stifling dissent and conversation.
If the Democrats are to perform some shape shifting the place to begin is in its charter, to allow a diversity of ideas rather than rigid identification politics.
It is apparent however that Ross does not attend Democratic party meetings. If he did he would find that an ongoing spiraling into a tighter and tighter funnel of leftist orthodoxy is attributable to the charter of the Dem party.
The party right now mandates an equal division of delegates on a male and female ratio. In addition to that preferences must be given to so called minorities such as blacks, gays and so forth. As a one time very active white male Dem it was demoralizing to see the preferential treatment given these groups.
I recall being ostracized for questioning gays or women having combat roles side by side heterosexual male troops. My point was not that they couldn’t win that battle, or that it might with effort be workable but what would be the price. Eventually I saw less and less white males being active who favored practical over ideological positions.
It was that slight skewing of the party that thus led to Hillary by coronation.
I approached the ACLU on the issue of quotas and the fact that within the Dem. party any support shown for any Republican automatically bans you being a delegate for 2 years. This even if your community were to elect you. Thus another tool for stifling dissent and conversation.
If the Democrats are to perform some shape shifting the place to begin is in its charter, to allow a diversity of ideas rather than rigid identification politics.
15
it's not that the dems need to move right, it's that they need to create jobs and pay attention to those who have lost their jobs. it doesn't matter if they are black, white, gay, straight, male, female, etc. it's just matters that people have some upward mobility. this is an inherently leftist position, since the right has redistributed wealth to the .01% over the past 30-40 years.
25
T rump was elected by a very slim majority in the rural areas of normally blue, or swing, states. He had the help of the KGB, KKK, and FBI. He had billions of dollars in free air time on every major TV network and column inches in the papers. He woke up the fears of an aging and shrinking white majority regarding immigrants, minorities, terrorism and foreigners in general. He is probably going to face impeachment if he doesn't distance himself from his money and children and no one expects this to turn out well.
Had the democratic party not seemed so disfavorable to Bernie Sanders in the primaries he could have won the election. A socialist!
Douthat is right about identity politics, however. A better way of communicating to the white working class that the party does have their best interests at heart is necessary. But we all know that what has worked for republicans the last 45+ years is getting white working class to fear the black and brown working class so the bosses can steal from both more easily. I think this may be the last time that con works.
Had the democratic party not seemed so disfavorable to Bernie Sanders in the primaries he could have won the election. A socialist!
Douthat is right about identity politics, however. A better way of communicating to the white working class that the party does have their best interests at heart is necessary. But we all know that what has worked for republicans the last 45+ years is getting white working class to fear the black and brown working class so the bosses can steal from both more easily. I think this may be the last time that con works.
25
Democrats have moved about as far right as they need to go. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are closer to Saint Ronald of Tampico regarding various policy positions than they are to Jimmy Carter. Bill Clinton ushered in the regulatory regulations that provided for the greatest organized criminal conspiracy known to humanity in the mortgage securities scam that broke the world economy. Democrats moving to the right isn't the required response to the imbecile waiting to take over administration of the executive branch of government. Standing back allowing the GOP to actually govern might work in making clear the futility of fundamentalist conservative orthodoxy, but working to prevent the most egregious attacks on the Treasury would be the most important role any democrat could pay in the looming Trump fiasco second only to preventing nuclear holocaust. The correct role for democrats is to babysit the two year old child who will be placed in charge of America.
14
Mr. Douthat frames his premise in the language of compromise, but the substance of his assertions amount to a simple ceding of ground to conservative principles. I say this because he has not listed any reciprocity on the part of the GOP.
11
Corollary to your thesis, Mr. Douthat:
Sen. Sanders, by pulling the Democratic Party to the left (cf. Sanders' claim in his book, Our Revolution, "Our campaign also had a huge impact on the writing of the most progressive platform, by far, in the history of the Democratic Party"), deserves some responsibility for Trump.
That goes double for his Bernie-or-bust supporters. Most myopic bumper sticker ever: "Don't blame me, I voted for Bernie."
Sen. Sanders, by pulling the Democratic Party to the left (cf. Sanders' claim in his book, Our Revolution, "Our campaign also had a huge impact on the writing of the most progressive platform, by far, in the history of the Democratic Party"), deserves some responsibility for Trump.
That goes double for his Bernie-or-bust supporters. Most myopic bumper sticker ever: "Don't blame me, I voted for Bernie."
3
This perpetuates the myth that Democrats are left-wing. I don't even know what that means in the context of US government. Surely most of us want government to make sure the roads are good and the cops paid, some sort of safety net so that we need not fear financial ruin due to circumstances outside our control, and then mainly to be left alone.
There could certainly be debate on the role of government in lives and the economy, but that's not what I'm seeing from either Republicans or Democrats. And the Republicans are hardly right-wing. Claiming that science does not exist and that religion should govern government are not right-wing positions.
There could certainly be debate on the role of government in lives and the economy, but that's not what I'm seeing from either Republicans or Democrats. And the Republicans are hardly right-wing. Claiming that science does not exist and that religion should govern government are not right-wing positions.
8
Democrats do not need to move to the right, they need to change their economic message. Republicans are robbing you blind. Then, remind people of the costs of every Republican, or conservative, vote.
9
Democrats have not started the "culture wars". Transgender bathrooms, undermining of established constitutional law of Roe v Wade, voter identity laws that disenfranchise groups of voters, and attempts to force religion into our secular society are all dog whistles of republicans to distract citizens.
Democrats are too far left? Hardly. They are not left enough.
Democrats are too far left? Hardly. They are not left enough.
10
The flaw in the premise of your question (and recommendations), Mr. Douthat is that you are conflating strategy with rectitude...what might be "effective political maneuvering" with the basics of Right and Wrong.
There are undoubted any number of strategic and organizational improvements that Progressives need to make in order to more effectively bring about our agenda...to your "half-credit", some of these are even listed by you. The problem is too much of what you suggest as moves that would be "strategically advantageous" for the Progressive "Cause" would, in actuality, be violations of what we see as core principles of Right and Wrong. Of little concern to you, I realize - their not confirming to your notions of political expediency or your (it has been my observation) far too tepid interest in economic, racial, religious, and gender equality - but while your fundamental recommendation that we " be smarter" in how we go about enacting our goal of making our nation a more equitable, ethical, morale, and just polity is reasonable - and good advice when stripped down that far, I would much prefer you occupy your dubiously deserved column space to advising your chosen colleagues on the Right on how to conduct themselves with less morale corruption and less empowerment of the the forces of Hatred than is their - apparent tendency, if not (as it seems to me, their outright goal).
There are undoubted any number of strategic and organizational improvements that Progressives need to make in order to more effectively bring about our agenda...to your "half-credit", some of these are even listed by you. The problem is too much of what you suggest as moves that would be "strategically advantageous" for the Progressive "Cause" would, in actuality, be violations of what we see as core principles of Right and Wrong. Of little concern to you, I realize - their not confirming to your notions of political expediency or your (it has been my observation) far too tepid interest in economic, racial, religious, and gender equality - but while your fundamental recommendation that we " be smarter" in how we go about enacting our goal of making our nation a more equitable, ethical, morale, and just polity is reasonable - and good advice when stripped down that far, I would much prefer you occupy your dubiously deserved column space to advising your chosen colleagues on the Right on how to conduct themselves with less morale corruption and less empowerment of the the forces of Hatred than is their - apparent tendency, if not (as it seems to me, their outright goal).
6
The Democratic Party is just beginning to recover from having slurred too far to the right to disaster us consequence. Hillary Clinton's 2.3 million advantage in the popular vote shows that there is still a demand for left-wing policies. Someone has to represent the downtrodden, the disabled, and the disenfranchised. Right wing politics are always the same and trickle down policies that only work for the upper tiers in our class-based society.
5
Ah here comes Ross with his suggestions to fix things. The democrats don't need a crime control agenda. Crime is just slightly above historic lows. The last crime control agenda produced a large part of the problems we have now. Disparate sentencing for identical crimes has helped to further cripple many minority communities.
How about we fix gerrymandering and voter suppression? Why don't we discuss the GOPs shameful attempts to suppress the vote, you know the real vote rigging that is going on right in front of our eyes? How about we discuss the Russians interfering in our elections? Why don't we discuss the head of the FBI violating the Hatch act? Why don't we discuss the fact that the president elect's chief advisor is a white supremacist, that his EPA appointment doesn't believe in climate change, that his AG was too racist to be a judge under a republican congress in the 1980s?
How about we fix gerrymandering and voter suppression? Why don't we discuss the GOPs shameful attempts to suppress the vote, you know the real vote rigging that is going on right in front of our eyes? How about we discuss the Russians interfering in our elections? Why don't we discuss the head of the FBI violating the Hatch act? Why don't we discuss the fact that the president elect's chief advisor is a white supremacist, that his EPA appointment doesn't believe in climate change, that his AG was too racist to be a judge under a republican congress in the 1980s?
8
"Democratic politicians could talk more favorably about moral and religious pluralism."
- The Dem postition DOES promote "moral pluralism": If you're against abortion, don't have one; if you're not gay, don't have a gay wedding; you can choose whatever bathroom you believe is morally correct, etc. It's YOUR side that wants to decree what's "morally correct," and not allow individuals to follow their own moral beliefs.
"It would not require Democrats abandoning their commitment to the social safety net to foreground programs more directly linked to work and independence."
- If the Reps would have let the Dems pass ANY legislation, then we could have instituted these programs, and we wouldn't need as big a safety net.
"Reverse the creep toward open borders-ism and mass amnesty; support a path to citizenship without supporting a perpetually ascending immigration rate."
- President Obama instituted exactly such a program: DACA. Reps want to repeal it, simply because Obama did it (while Reps stalled on it).
"The party’s (laudable) support for criminal justice... reform left its leaders struggling to find a language to address the post-Ferguson spike in lawlessness that pushed public support for the police upward and helped Donald Trump on his path."
- If Dems' support for reform of criminal justice is "laudable," then the only reason you contested the "language" is because Dems did it.
- Instead, Reps embraced Trump's language, which promotes lawlessness, fear, and hatred.
- The Dem postition DOES promote "moral pluralism": If you're against abortion, don't have one; if you're not gay, don't have a gay wedding; you can choose whatever bathroom you believe is morally correct, etc. It's YOUR side that wants to decree what's "morally correct," and not allow individuals to follow their own moral beliefs.
"It would not require Democrats abandoning their commitment to the social safety net to foreground programs more directly linked to work and independence."
- If the Reps would have let the Dems pass ANY legislation, then we could have instituted these programs, and we wouldn't need as big a safety net.
"Reverse the creep toward open borders-ism and mass amnesty; support a path to citizenship without supporting a perpetually ascending immigration rate."
- President Obama instituted exactly such a program: DACA. Reps want to repeal it, simply because Obama did it (while Reps stalled on it).
"The party’s (laudable) support for criminal justice... reform left its leaders struggling to find a language to address the post-Ferguson spike in lawlessness that pushed public support for the police upward and helped Donald Trump on his path."
- If Dems' support for reform of criminal justice is "laudable," then the only reason you contested the "language" is because Dems did it.
- Instead, Reps embraced Trump's language, which promotes lawlessness, fear, and hatred.
6
The easiest thing for me - a communist - to do would be to throw it all away, become a right winger and embrace Fukuyama's thesis that capitalism is the end stage of humanity development and that now we live in the best world possible.
But the problem is that the right-wing is not an alternative for humanity. Trump is a farce (as is HRC, but she is not a problem any more, at least in the short term), winning or not winning the elections, his economic policies will fail, the lives of the American people will continue to get worse, and the world will continue its road to collapse.
We've reached a point where another world must not only be possible, but necessary. We're fighting for survival now, not simply ideological choices.
But the problem is that the right-wing is not an alternative for humanity. Trump is a farce (as is HRC, but she is not a problem any more, at least in the short term), winning or not winning the elections, his economic policies will fail, the lives of the American people will continue to get worse, and the world will continue its road to collapse.
We've reached a point where another world must not only be possible, but necessary. We're fighting for survival now, not simply ideological choices.
5
OK this whole paragraph:
"For instance: Democrats could attempt to declare a culture-war truce, consolidating the gains of the Obama era while disavowing attempts to regulate institutions and communities that don’t follow the current social-liberal line. That would mean no more fines for Catholic charities and hospitals, no more transgender-bathroom directives handed down from the White House to local schools, and restraint rather than ruthlessness in future debates over funding and accreditation for conservative religious schools. Without backing away from their support for same-sex marriage and legal abortion, leading Democratic politicians could talk more favorably about moral and religious pluralism, and offer reassurances to people who feel themselves to be dissenters from a very novel cultural regime."
Put some flesh on the bones, Douthat. Anyone with half a brain can read through and see that there is a fundamental conflict between civil rights and religion that would come into play immediately. Your "sophistry" failed.
"For instance: Democrats could attempt to declare a culture-war truce, consolidating the gains of the Obama era while disavowing attempts to regulate institutions and communities that don’t follow the current social-liberal line. That would mean no more fines for Catholic charities and hospitals, no more transgender-bathroom directives handed down from the White House to local schools, and restraint rather than ruthlessness in future debates over funding and accreditation for conservative religious schools. Without backing away from their support for same-sex marriage and legal abortion, leading Democratic politicians could talk more favorably about moral and religious pluralism, and offer reassurances to people who feel themselves to be dissenters from a very novel cultural regime."
Put some flesh on the bones, Douthat. Anyone with half a brain can read through and see that there is a fundamental conflict between civil rights and religion that would come into play immediately. Your "sophistry" failed.
5
Mr. Douthat ........ you're forgetting something. The country did vote for Hillary Clinton. She received over two million more votes than Donald Trump; who is, you must admit, a minority President elect. After Trump and the Republicans have over reached enough, Democrats will take back the House and Senate and you will write a column mourning the leftward drift of the country.
3
The Democratic Party will eventually move left, sometime after President Trump's first term in office.
What the disgruntled people in the midwest don't realize is (yet) what they really need is a Tennessee Valley Authority scale intervention for the midwest. Too bad they don't vote that way. Yet.
Just as the TVA region was particularly devastated by the Great Depression, so has the Midwest been by globalization. Economically speaking, it needs a hard reset, as their ability to attract business and retain talented young people is not sufficient to be self sustaining. Who's going to invest where they can't attract talent?
A project that centered around renewable energy investment and applications might be the way to go. There's not a lot of direct competition from the private sector, most clean energy infrastructure development will require a massive government investment anyway. Why not invest where it would do the most good?
What the disgruntled people in the midwest don't realize is (yet) what they really need is a Tennessee Valley Authority scale intervention for the midwest. Too bad they don't vote that way. Yet.
Just as the TVA region was particularly devastated by the Great Depression, so has the Midwest been by globalization. Economically speaking, it needs a hard reset, as their ability to attract business and retain talented young people is not sufficient to be self sustaining. Who's going to invest where they can't attract talent?
A project that centered around renewable energy investment and applications might be the way to go. There's not a lot of direct competition from the private sector, most clean energy infrastructure development will require a massive government investment anyway. Why not invest where it would do the most good?
5
Let me make sure I get this right.
The party that won the popular vote in the presidential election, and picked up seats in both the House and Senate (having actually won more House votes than the opposition) should move to the right?
This, after having lost to a candidate that no one believes when he says he is conservative, and is in fact a social liberal with big spending ideas.
I get that the Democrats got complacent and lost the election. And such losses have consequences. But to suggest that Democratic appeal is in tatters is a deep misgiving of the present moments
I'll tell you what will almost certainly happen: the administration of our possibly mentally unstable new president, combined with the proven incompetence and zealotry of Congressional Republicans, will drive the country into a ditch. If we are not embroiled in a colossal crisis by then, the public will flock to the Democrats, and pundits will be left to wonder where the GOP went wrong.
The party that won the popular vote in the presidential election, and picked up seats in both the House and Senate (having actually won more House votes than the opposition) should move to the right?
This, after having lost to a candidate that no one believes when he says he is conservative, and is in fact a social liberal with big spending ideas.
I get that the Democrats got complacent and lost the election. And such losses have consequences. But to suggest that Democratic appeal is in tatters is a deep misgiving of the present moments
I'll tell you what will almost certainly happen: the administration of our possibly mentally unstable new president, combined with the proven incompetence and zealotry of Congressional Republicans, will drive the country into a ditch. If we are not embroiled in a colossal crisis by then, the public will flock to the Democrats, and pundits will be left to wonder where the GOP went wrong.
11
The Democrats did not lose because they were too left-wing. They lost because they have been captured by the billionaire class, just as the Republicans have been. For that reason, Democrats mostly ignored the concerns of the middle class, blacks, and labor unions.
People voting for Trump were not voting for the privatization of Social Security, Medicare, Education and roads. They were voting against the status quo, which HRC represented.
The biggest scandal in the Obama administration was the failure to prosecute bankers after the 2008 financial collapse brought on by fraud. To understand how massive that fraud was, see the Big Short, book or movie. By contrast over 800 Savings & Loan executives were convicted and imprisoned in the (tiny by comparison) S&L scandal of the ‘80s.
The answer is not for Democrats to become even more right wing. Remember, this is the party that appointed the President as judge, jury and executioner of anyone accused of terrorism. The Obama administration also imprisoned more whistle-blowers that all previous Presidents combined. We certainly do NOT need a more right-wing Democratic party.
What we do need is a party that raises its money from regular people, as Bernie Sanders did. If the Democrats do that, they will be beholden to regular people. If they raise their money from billionaires, …
People voting for Trump were not voting for the privatization of Social Security, Medicare, Education and roads. They were voting against the status quo, which HRC represented.
The biggest scandal in the Obama administration was the failure to prosecute bankers after the 2008 financial collapse brought on by fraud. To understand how massive that fraud was, see the Big Short, book or movie. By contrast over 800 Savings & Loan executives were convicted and imprisoned in the (tiny by comparison) S&L scandal of the ‘80s.
The answer is not for Democrats to become even more right wing. Remember, this is the party that appointed the President as judge, jury and executioner of anyone accused of terrorism. The Obama administration also imprisoned more whistle-blowers that all previous Presidents combined. We certainly do NOT need a more right-wing Democratic party.
What we do need is a party that raises its money from regular people, as Bernie Sanders did. If the Democrats do that, they will be beholden to regular people. If they raise their money from billionaires, …
72
Cats seldom read columns by dogs about how cats should change.
13
I hope that the Democratic Party and all Americans who value freedom of speech and civil liberties that are the foundation of a healthy democratic society REFUSE to begin to sell out... The reality is that a significant portion of American voters were duped and manipulated by a corrupt group of ego-driven wealthy white boys who will not deliver on few if any of the promises they have made the American public. Are you asking me to back and give in to leaders who believe that Climate Change is myth? That American women do not deserve the right to choose? That the American public do not deserve access to affordable health care? That ALL American children do not deserve the opportunity to participate in a meaningful and effective education experience because their parents can't afford to live in wealthy, Christian communities? That people who do not identify as heterosexual don't have deserve the same civil rights as the rest of us? That I should pretend that we are not a country that honors the rich diversity of humanity. NEVER! The next 4 years are going to be ugly but it will become downright TRAGIC if members of the Democratic Party begin pretending what Mr. Trump and his protégées are proposing is an positive path for this country.
9
Look at the numbers. Put together Clinton's votes with the Green Party votes and Trump would be in the rear view.
And let us lay to rest this group think about a shallow bench for the Dems. There are exciting new people coming to the Senate-- Harris from California, Duckworth from Illinois, Cortez Masto from Nevada, and Hassan from New Hampshire. Newsome in California and Cuomo in New York are on the horizon. Keith Ellison and one of the Castro twins in the House of Representatives. And, lest we be ageist, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren can still excite a progressive base.
The Dems need to stay the progressive concourse because the country is more progressive than the 2016 election showed.
And let us lay to rest this group think about a shallow bench for the Dems. There are exciting new people coming to the Senate-- Harris from California, Duckworth from Illinois, Cortez Masto from Nevada, and Hassan from New Hampshire. Newsome in California and Cuomo in New York are on the horizon. Keith Ellison and one of the Castro twins in the House of Representatives. And, lest we be ageist, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren can still excite a progressive base.
The Dems need to stay the progressive concourse because the country is more progressive than the 2016 election showed.
9
Open-border liberalism is lunacy. The idea that anyone who walks across the border should be entitled to US citizenship is lunacy. Where do you think the USA will be in 50 to 100 years with open borders? More like Mexico? I voted for Hillary and would vote for her again, but it is obvious to me that open-borders is so radical that it will help elect Republicans at every election until Democrats come to their senses.
6
It is extraordinary that most respondents to this essay seem to believe that the American Left need make no changes to the way it does business as a time of unprecedented danger and darkness descends on our country.
I live in the State of Illinois where the Democratic machine has has run the state into the ground with debt and unfunded pension liability, as has been the case in a number of other states and cities where the Democrats hold power.
While Mr. Douthat may be a hypocrite of the first order who only now, with Donald Trump about to take office, acknowledges the many sins of the Republican Party who have used race as the primary engine of their electoral strategy for fifty years, he is absolutely correct in the gist of his analysis.
I live in the State of Illinois where the Democratic machine has has run the state into the ground with debt and unfunded pension liability, as has been the case in a number of other states and cities where the Democrats hold power.
While Mr. Douthat may be a hypocrite of the first order who only now, with Donald Trump about to take office, acknowledges the many sins of the Republican Party who have used race as the primary engine of their electoral strategy for fifty years, he is absolutely correct in the gist of his analysis.
4
I have to say that I've enjoyed many of the recent centrist-oriented op-eds on the New York Times over the last few days (this and David Brooks' recent column). And then I read the incendiery comments on these articles and feel despair. (I think I last felt this way when reading the comments on Kristof's articles about liberal intolerance on college campuses.)
Personally, I find a lot of hope in messages of compromise and reaching across the aisle. I'm a center-leftist in a red state and I think that being around conservatives has made me a better person, challenging me to see most issues in a more complex and nuanced way and pulling me to more moderate positions on policy. I want that for our country and it just makes me sad that so many NYTimes readers just insist that the best answer is for the Dems to dig in their heels and refuse to work across the aisle. But thanks for at least trying, though, Douthat.
Personally, I find a lot of hope in messages of compromise and reaching across the aisle. I'm a center-leftist in a red state and I think that being around conservatives has made me a better person, challenging me to see most issues in a more complex and nuanced way and pulling me to more moderate positions on policy. I want that for our country and it just makes me sad that so many NYTimes readers just insist that the best answer is for the Dems to dig in their heels and refuse to work across the aisle. But thanks for at least trying, though, Douthat.
8
Instead, let's ask if the Democrats will do "what's right"? And that's not move right, but remain the Progressive Party it has always leaned in the direction of as it tried to be everything for all people. And it's not easy. Because, those who vote against them refuse to accept that the Democratic Party stands for what is in their best interest. They just don't get it, don't realize that the Republican Party and it's Evangelicals and gun supporting NRA, gun Lobbyists, and Gun Manufacturers do not hiave their best interests at heart when it comes to social programs, education, and economic measures. The Dems just need to start getting out in front on the issues and their candidates and quit letting the Republicans do what Karl Rove has been very good at since he entered politics, and that's what the Republicans have been beating the Democrats over the head with for decades: The Republicans define the candidate and the issues before the Democrats do. The Democrats end up wasting precious time when they lag behind and allow the Republican Party Spin Machine get cranked up and start spinning what's the truth and what's fake news. And it has to stop. We just saw how Donald Trump just lied and exaggerated his way to the presidency and kept the Senate and House out of reach in the process. The Democratic Party needs to stand firm but quit taking spatulas to knife fights.
6
Typical for the NYT, these comments are straight from the echo chamber. Democrats don't need to change! Republicans are crazy! Ross Douthat is wrong!
I get it. I was one of you once. Lifelong Democrat, 2x Obama volunteer. But this year, I just couldn't do it.
Democrats lost me with their handling of Ferguson. The protests happened 2 blocks from my house. My community was nearly destroyed. Lawlessness did in fact spike, as Douthat suggests. And a whole lot of good, innocent people were thrown under the bus - all for what? Obama's legacy?
The DNC was so tone-deaf, they thought it was a good idea to showcase Michael Brown's mother. Did they truly not recognize the suffering of others impacted by the riots? Or the need to balance respect for law with the fight for changes in the criminal justice system?
I saw a party pandering so hard to one of its constituencies that it simply left a lot of folks out of the conversation. I guess that makes me a racist, right? Does it make me a Republican? Definitely not. But I can tell you that Democrats will continue to lose elections until they figure out a way to bring people like me back into the fold.
I get it. I was one of you once. Lifelong Democrat, 2x Obama volunteer. But this year, I just couldn't do it.
Democrats lost me with their handling of Ferguson. The protests happened 2 blocks from my house. My community was nearly destroyed. Lawlessness did in fact spike, as Douthat suggests. And a whole lot of good, innocent people were thrown under the bus - all for what? Obama's legacy?
The DNC was so tone-deaf, they thought it was a good idea to showcase Michael Brown's mother. Did they truly not recognize the suffering of others impacted by the riots? Or the need to balance respect for law with the fight for changes in the criminal justice system?
I saw a party pandering so hard to one of its constituencies that it simply left a lot of folks out of the conversation. I guess that makes me a racist, right? Does it make me a Republican? Definitely not. But I can tell you that Democrats will continue to lose elections until they figure out a way to bring people like me back into the fold.
6
Democrats lost by capitulating Congress. They ran against Trump, not a Congress that blocked everything President Obama tried to do. When something isn't working, people's knee jerk reaction is to blame whoever's in charge. The Republicans did a good job of making it seem like Obama was to blame, not their own willful obstruction.
5
"Culture-war truce"? Last time I checked, so-called "Christian" conservatives were still screaming about Starbucks holiday cups while condemning attempts to provide refugees with shelter.
Boomer conservatism is a whited sephulchre, and lazy self-satisfied moral scolds like Mr. Douthat are a minority among their demographic peers.
Boomer conservatism is a whited sephulchre, and lazy self-satisfied moral scolds like Mr. Douthat are a minority among their demographic peers.
6
It will be far easier than for the uneducated white voters to inform themselves. It will be far easier than for the Republican party, Fox News, and Ross Douthat to stop misinforming the white uneducated white voter. It will be far easier than for major news organizations like the NYT to stop operating out of a sense of fairness and false equivalency. It will be far easier than for the Democratic party to address the major issue of the white uneducated voters, Good Jobs. Americans who are gainfully employed are much less concerned with their own prejudices concerning God, guns, and gays.
I have concluded that the Democratic Party can be very effective if it decides to become an opposition party. It might even be more effective in that role than in a governing role. It may then mean that the party does not have to move to the right very much, if at all. What it must do, though, is keep reminding the Republican working class voters that while they may not like Democrats, which is understandable, that their allies in the Republican business class are really not that interested in the plight of the working class either. It is important for Democrats that a divided Republican Party not become a united party, united only by a common fear of Democrats! The next four or eight years do not have to be the dark ages. But Democrats have to become very smart, rather than leaning to the right.
2
I believe Hillary Clinton, if elected, would have moved to the Center -- in fact, Democrats today would more likely be described as moderate Republicans. It's this hard Right Republican agenda that terrifies people and something the President-Elect played to. Let's face it -- his win is slim with a little more than 100K votes in three states that put him over the top, so there is no real mandate with the American people who still remain in the middle and are more sane about most issues. The real issue here is 47 percent of the electorate not getting out and voting for a whole host of reasons - much of it due to voter suppression and apathy. The hard Right will say anything to get elected -- look at our future President -- a businessman who has cared for nothing but having his name on buildings (and anything else) for his entire life -- money or the pretense of it got him elected. Lies got him elected -- I think normalizing his Presidency of the hard Right agenda would be a mistake, but Democrats should by all means take a good, hard look going forward and see how they and the rest of us are going to deal with what will be dark days ahead if they and the hard Right don't move back to the middle because that is truly where most Americans sit.
2
Why the funeral for the Dems? They won the national vote, the gained 2 seats in Senate and 1e in House. Seems to me more of a rejection of Reps.
Looks like Dem gov for NC which is a rejection of the strict bathroom laws.
Reps played games with the local districting to group their hardline supporters in ways to water down the Dem leaning districts.
Voter turnout is low (usually Dem voters stay home) because the red states make sure to dishearten Dem voters in their area. Empower those voters and though that may not turn the states blue in the short term, it will drive up the popular vote count.
Trump is the horrible dying convulsions of the ugly animal the Reps have become. This op ed piece is just an example of how incideous the conservative message is - like the devil saying you can have it all for yourself, just need to get rid of lazy people who are gorging themselves on your hard work.
That social theory, like trickle down economics, has long been refuted by facts.
Looks like Dem gov for NC which is a rejection of the strict bathroom laws.
Reps played games with the local districting to group their hardline supporters in ways to water down the Dem leaning districts.
Voter turnout is low (usually Dem voters stay home) because the red states make sure to dishearten Dem voters in their area. Empower those voters and though that may not turn the states blue in the short term, it will drive up the popular vote count.
Trump is the horrible dying convulsions of the ugly animal the Reps have become. This op ed piece is just an example of how incideous the conservative message is - like the devil saying you can have it all for yourself, just need to get rid of lazy people who are gorging themselves on your hard work.
That social theory, like trickle down economics, has long been refuted by facts.
3
Great column. This is what I want from my public intellectuals (a position of responsibility btw) and I appreciate the other viewpoints you linked early on.
At first I was skeptical about your idea the Ds need to move right. "I Like Ike" comes close to describing my political reflexes; and Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and Barack Obama seem sensible, centrist, and open to compromise to me. Yet in return they got the tactics and strategies of Newt Gingrich, Tom DeLay, Karl Rove, Mitch McConnell, and the ghost of Lee Atwater.
But when I read exactly what you mean by moving right, I tend to agree. Climate change is not a left-right issue for me until one gets into the weeds of figuring out the exact government response; and I don't want to bring sorrow into the lives of people who are gay. But calling for the repeal of the Hyde amendment (Catholic taxes pay for abortion) was madness and evidences a jaw-dropping lack of empathy. The Ds allowing their social justice agenda to become a series of battles over who uses what bathroom was political malpractice of a high order.
Sometimes I see life and politics as a dance. Your column today makes you a pretty good dance partner for the Ds. I hope someone nice takes your outstretched hand.
At first I was skeptical about your idea the Ds need to move right. "I Like Ike" comes close to describing my political reflexes; and Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and Barack Obama seem sensible, centrist, and open to compromise to me. Yet in return they got the tactics and strategies of Newt Gingrich, Tom DeLay, Karl Rove, Mitch McConnell, and the ghost of Lee Atwater.
But when I read exactly what you mean by moving right, I tend to agree. Climate change is not a left-right issue for me until one gets into the weeds of figuring out the exact government response; and I don't want to bring sorrow into the lives of people who are gay. But calling for the repeal of the Hyde amendment (Catholic taxes pay for abortion) was madness and evidences a jaw-dropping lack of empathy. The Ds allowing their social justice agenda to become a series of battles over who uses what bathroom was political malpractice of a high order.
Sometimes I see life and politics as a dance. Your column today makes you a pretty good dance partner for the Ds. I hope someone nice takes your outstretched hand.
4
What a strange article. Why should Democrats try to follow a party that is leading us down the road to perdition? We lost because our candidate was damaged and too cozy with corporations. When West Virginians and other Trump voters figure out he lied to them, too, they'll be looking for a Bernie Sanders or an Elizabeth Warren.
3
Stop your preaching and remember these key words and phrases, Douthat, because each will prove to be pivotal in the downfall of Trump's administration and the disintegration of the Republican Party:
social security, healthcare, medicare, manufacturing jobs for the under-educated, medicaid, fascism, religious Taliban, church-based school vouchers, privatization of veterans administration benefits, free trade, tariffs, radical Islamic terrorism, unaffordable college tuition, demagoguery, sycophants, misogynist, take our country back, minimum wage, women's rights, misogyny, LGBT rights, millennials.
social security, healthcare, medicare, manufacturing jobs for the under-educated, medicaid, fascism, religious Taliban, church-based school vouchers, privatization of veterans administration benefits, free trade, tariffs, radical Islamic terrorism, unaffordable college tuition, demagoguery, sycophants, misogynist, take our country back, minimum wage, women's rights, misogyny, LGBT rights, millennials.
2
I hope it all happens. Ross Douthat for the DNC chair. (I'm not being ironic, at least not in spirit.) Ask Elizabeth Warren if she supports a woman's right to an abortion or LGBT rights or same-sex marriage. She would say "sure we support that, we're democrats". She would then go on to talk about minimum wages or bankruptcy law. Democrats have never nominated a workers' candidate, at least not in recent history. Bernie Sanders could have been that candidate but the party wasn't ready. Maybe now things will change.
3
Accepting Ross Douthat's prescription for the Democratic Party is like throwing away my blood pressure medication on the advice of my worst enemy. The idea that Barack Obama was "left wing" is an absurdity. He was Reagan-Lite just like every candidate the Democrats nominated after Walter Mondale.
Fact is liberalism is dead. But then so is conservatism; Donald Trump saw to that. They are both so much shattered ideological wreckage; the detritus of a fading liberal democracy. Mr. Douthat here is simply trying to fit the old paradigm onto a wholly new, uncharted political landscape. The electorate didn't "move to the right", Mr. Douthat, it took a turn for the reactionary. And not just a paltry third of the Republican Primary, but a good 49% of the national electorate.
For those of us who still cling to the spirit of democratic principle, we are only left with the words of Theoden in the Lord of the Rings:
"What can men do against such reckless hate?"
Fact is liberalism is dead. But then so is conservatism; Donald Trump saw to that. They are both so much shattered ideological wreckage; the detritus of a fading liberal democracy. Mr. Douthat here is simply trying to fit the old paradigm onto a wholly new, uncharted political landscape. The electorate didn't "move to the right", Mr. Douthat, it took a turn for the reactionary. And not just a paltry third of the Republican Primary, but a good 49% of the national electorate.
For those of us who still cling to the spirit of democratic principle, we are only left with the words of Theoden in the Lord of the Rings:
"What can men do against such reckless hate?"
4
Moving to the right is the absolute last thing the Democrats need to do. The party of FDR, Truman, and the Kennedys lost its way when it took for granted the support it expected to sustain from the working class. Complacency did the Democrats in. To experience resuscitation, Democrats in Congress need to stand fast for its ideals: better pay for the working class, guaranteed security of social security and Medicare, an immigration policy that continues to welcome those from other countries, a fair progressive taxation plan requiring the rich to pay their fair share and terminate the endless loopholes they utilize, and, most of all, a reconnecting with everyday people who turned to Trump not out of admiration but out of frustration with the business as usually mentality in Washington. Trump will do everything in his power to move this country way to the right. Democrats cannot be silent bystanders.
3
First of all what the DEMs did after reagan was to be more right wing than reagan that is how Clinton won in 92. He was reagan part 4 & 5.
Today the DEMs are even further right than the DINO Bill Clinton. Look at how President Obama has been in his entire length of office he has done things even reagan (let us not forget reagan was ultra right wing in his day) would not have done. Drones! Prosecution of leakers! GITMO still open! Failure to prosecute war criminals just because they wear our uniform!!!!!
To be a proper DEM they would have to go back to the very liberal of mind and conservative of traditional values (in the real meanings of those words not the prostituted reagan/GOP meanings) DEM party of President Lyndon B. Johnson.
Today the DEMs are even further right than the DINO Bill Clinton. Look at how President Obama has been in his entire length of office he has done things even reagan (let us not forget reagan was ultra right wing in his day) would not have done. Drones! Prosecution of leakers! GITMO still open! Failure to prosecute war criminals just because they wear our uniform!!!!!
To be a proper DEM they would have to go back to the very liberal of mind and conservative of traditional values (in the real meanings of those words not the prostituted reagan/GOP meanings) DEM party of President Lyndon B. Johnson.
4
I don't know what you've been reading or watching Mr. Douthat but the Democratic Party has been moving to the right for a few decades now trying to be the Republican "Lite" wing of the Republican Party. But you know, why vote for the D's when you can vote for the real thing. This is why they've lost so much ground over the years: Pretending to be different but being the same. As Freud said, the vanity of small differences...
3
You lost me when you suggested that Democrats give up on transgender rights. Absolutely not. The "T" in "LGBT" cannot be forgotten for the sake of political expediency.
I've been hearing this Republican rhetoric about Democrats and bathrooms a lot; that Democrats are obsessed with bathrooms and need to calm down. This is a classic case of Republicans rocking the boat and then blaming Democrats for the commotion when we object to it. Nobody was concerned about transgender people and bathrooms until Republican lawmakers decided to pass legislation on it. Perhaps it's Republicans who should stop focusing so much on identity politics.
I've been hearing this Republican rhetoric about Democrats and bathrooms a lot; that Democrats are obsessed with bathrooms and need to calm down. This is a classic case of Republicans rocking the boat and then blaming Democrats for the commotion when we object to it. Nobody was concerned about transgender people and bathrooms until Republican lawmakers decided to pass legislation on it. Perhaps it's Republicans who should stop focusing so much on identity politics.
4
They should move as far to the right and the Republicans moved to the left after their 2008 drubbing. Afterall Republicans demonstrated that political accomodation to the victor yields huge electoral benefits in the following years.
2
The meme continues. Democrats lost touch with America. The loss was inevitable in retrospect. On and on and on.
The loss was inevitable because the Democratic Party did virtually nothing to monitor or fight one of the most extraordinary and stealthy voter suppression campaigns ever invented. That's not a conspiracy theory. This one was actually documented by the people who carried it out.
When you lose an election in key states by margins of 3/10 of a percent and 8/10 of a percent and 1.1%, that doesn't show a failure of policy. It shows a failure of knowing how to win elections. It shows the failure to understand the meaning of "at any cost." The Democrats may not understand what that means, but somebody does.
The loss was inevitable because the Democratic Party did virtually nothing to monitor or fight one of the most extraordinary and stealthy voter suppression campaigns ever invented. That's not a conspiracy theory. This one was actually documented by the people who carried it out.
When you lose an election in key states by margins of 3/10 of a percent and 8/10 of a percent and 1.1%, that doesn't show a failure of policy. It shows a failure of knowing how to win elections. It shows the failure to understand the meaning of "at any cost." The Democrats may not understand what that means, but somebody does.
8
The Democrats lost mostly because the white Republican majority did not want Obama to succeed as the President since he was black. He was unable to pass any legislation that might have helped the rust belt. This may have lead the ignorant rust belt supporters of Trump to feel that they were forgotten. Blacks in these states did not see the peril of not voting for a white woman - color of the skin culture is well and thriving in the country and qualifications of the candidate may not be an issue any more. China will be the winner of all this discourse and the world would see a change in the world order.
Democrats need only stress one economic message: Republicans are robbing you blind. Follow up with a reminder of the way Republican policies pass costs to the taxpayers.
4
Our primary electoral system is the nemesis of Democratic Party.
Not all of us have intimate knowledge of the characters of the candidates. Campaign slogans are just slogans. In a representative democratic system, we trust professional few and these people choose the candidates. Of course the old back room politics brought mistakes. But they also brought success like LBJ. For long time, democratic parties brought forth mostly dismal candidates.
Review of Democratic choice tells story. Obama is eminently decent and thoughtful president. But he is not a politician. Bill Clinton was likable person who has been dogged by scandals. None may be illegal, but a lot of them were shameful.
Not all of us have intimate knowledge of the characters of the candidates. Campaign slogans are just slogans. In a representative democratic system, we trust professional few and these people choose the candidates. Of course the old back room politics brought mistakes. But they also brought success like LBJ. For long time, democratic parties brought forth mostly dismal candidates.
Review of Democratic choice tells story. Obama is eminently decent and thoughtful president. But he is not a politician. Bill Clinton was likable person who has been dogged by scandals. None may be illegal, but a lot of them were shameful.
Voters distrust politicians, often with good reason. Had the DNC made an open primary process instead of anointing Ms. Clinton years ago, Webb, Biden or possibly Sanders might have won against what might have been a different Republican. Democrats seemed to think it was a woman's turn to be president (before the charming well spoken black guy slipped in) so the increasing failings of Ms. Clinton were ignored. Her email server, clearly set up to hide messages from FOIA requests, multiple explanations about turning over all her messages and a less than successful stint as Secretary of State combined with questionable practices about her earning money from speeches and how her foundation, employing all her political operatives, was entwined with her work, proved her untrustworthy.
When she spoke, it was always a shout out to a list of special groups, not simply potential voters. If people in middle America felt left out, it was because they were.
When she spoke, it was always a shout out to a list of special groups, not simply potential voters. If people in middle America felt left out, it was because they were.
4
Hillary lost because the perception is that she is a corrupt career politician, a hawk, squarely in the pocket of big business. It isn't that she's too far to the left, it's that she didn't appear to be materially different than anyone on the right.
The sad fact is our nation was bored being governed by a methodical, reasonable, thoughtful Obama, whose occasionally maddening pragmatism resembles inertia to the disenfranchised.
The sad fact is our nation was bored being governed by a methodical, reasonable, thoughtful Obama, whose occasionally maddening pragmatism resembles inertia to the disenfranchised.
55
Really? Democrats have been governing in the center, if not to the right of it, for way too long. Obama's leftward move? By passing a Republican health care law? Please! And when was the last time the Republican party moved toward the center after defeat? Why is it good for one but not the other?
The party completely misread the anti-establishment mood of the country and put the wrong candidate forward for this presidential election. I truly believe that is the bottom line here.
And I'm getting a bit tired of the message that liberals need to open their minds and listen to other viewpoints but conservatives and their supporters are not asked to reciprocate. Why not? Is there not an inherent bias and condescension in that? Are those who vote Republican and/or Trump not capable of opening their minds? I don't believe that's true and I believe when we dig deep enough we find that there is more agreement than disagreement in how we would like our society to be.
The party completely misread the anti-establishment mood of the country and put the wrong candidate forward for this presidential election. I truly believe that is the bottom line here.
And I'm getting a bit tired of the message that liberals need to open their minds and listen to other viewpoints but conservatives and their supporters are not asked to reciprocate. Why not? Is there not an inherent bias and condescension in that? Are those who vote Republican and/or Trump not capable of opening their minds? I don't believe that's true and I believe when we dig deep enough we find that there is more agreement than disagreement in how we would like our society to be.
8
The democrats have spent too many years moving to the right. I think that Bernie proved it is time to move back to the left.
10
Move right, nonsense the folks in my neck of the woods who switched to Trump want more government intervention to provide health and dental care that is not dependent on their job. They want help with the transition to a global and technology economic environment. They want the government to acknowledge their pains and fears.
Yes, the Democrats could spend a little less time worrying about LGBT and minority issues and more time helping the people who work every day and perceive slackers as the prime beneficiaries of Democrat policies.
To abandon women's reproductive freedom and to abandon separation of Church and State would be the death knell pf the Democrat Party.
Perhaps that is Douthat's goal in writing this little piece.
Yes, the Democrats could spend a little less time worrying about LGBT and minority issues and more time helping the people who work every day and perceive slackers as the prime beneficiaries of Democrat policies.
To abandon women's reproductive freedom and to abandon separation of Church and State would be the death knell pf the Democrat Party.
Perhaps that is Douthat's goal in writing this little piece.
5
Given Clinton is winning the popular vote, this seems like a silly idea. Many people think the problem is, that the party has moved too far to the right already. I think after the Republicans dismantle the Affordable Care Act, attempt (hopefully without success) to dismantle both Medicare and Social Security, that people will not be interested in two right-of-center parties, but in joining a party whose values are supporting all Americans, not the wealthy few.
57
Russ, I agree that democrats need to me more centrist on some issues. The biggest piece to the democrats repair is the red counties, not states but counties. If you contrast the working-class voters in the urban an rural counties you find that they are very similar in their desires and fears. The biggest difference between them is that what is happening now in the red counties, manufacturing and semi-skilled (like mining) jobs are leaving while in the cities those jobs have been gone for several generations.
Donald Trump is right (my fingers are burning after typing that) in that our trade relationships need to be re-evaluated. I was surprised to read recently that the NAFTA provision to meet annually and adjust the treaty provisions has not been activated (no meeting) for many years.
On the other side, republicans need to move back toward the center as well. They also need to be willing to compromise. One of the great losses of the past dozen years has been the creation of a conservative movement that is all or nothing and that resultant removal of the experiences politicians who understood that government for all requires compromise by all.
As for the argument that democrats are a losing coalition I point to the senate where republicans only hold 51 or 52 seats while DJT won 30 states to HRC's 20. And the democrats gained a seat or two in this election. The republicans have focused on state governments, much more so than democrats, hence their lead there.
Donald Trump is right (my fingers are burning after typing that) in that our trade relationships need to be re-evaluated. I was surprised to read recently that the NAFTA provision to meet annually and adjust the treaty provisions has not been activated (no meeting) for many years.
On the other side, republicans need to move back toward the center as well. They also need to be willing to compromise. One of the great losses of the past dozen years has been the creation of a conservative movement that is all or nothing and that resultant removal of the experiences politicians who understood that government for all requires compromise by all.
As for the argument that democrats are a losing coalition I point to the senate where republicans only hold 51 or 52 seats while DJT won 30 states to HRC's 20. And the democrats gained a seat or two in this election. The republicans have focused on state governments, much more so than democrats, hence their lead there.
2
Despite Mr. Douthat's characterization of liberals (progressives, Democrats), I, being of that ilk, offer a different perspective. I suggest dropping the notion of moving "right" or "left" and, instead substitute pragmatism. Supplant these ideological tinged terms with "what works".
For example, take health care. In almost all democratic societies universal health care is highly valued by the electorate, and most have a system -- each different -- that mostly works. Hence, on this subject we know, or should know, a lot about "what works". That should be what guides us on that issue. Instead, we seemingly are heading (rightward) toward a Tom Price "solution", which, so far as I can tell, is without a single successful example worldwide, past or present.
So I suggest to Mr. Douthat that what works, or is most likely to work among alternatives, is a better guide to progress, to solving problems, than shifting ideologically "right" or "left".
All that said, from a purely political perspective I concede that lying may well trump "what works".
For example, take health care. In almost all democratic societies universal health care is highly valued by the electorate, and most have a system -- each different -- that mostly works. Hence, on this subject we know, or should know, a lot about "what works". That should be what guides us on that issue. Instead, we seemingly are heading (rightward) toward a Tom Price "solution", which, so far as I can tell, is without a single successful example worldwide, past or present.
So I suggest to Mr. Douthat that what works, or is most likely to work among alternatives, is a better guide to progress, to solving problems, than shifting ideologically "right" or "left".
All that said, from a purely political perspective I concede that lying may well trump "what works".
4
Ross, given the way Obama governed, and Clinton voted as a $enator and worked as Secretary of State, these avatars of the Democratic Party would have to move left...to find Reagan.
The Republican Party of today would have to move left...to find Goldwater.
The Republican Party of today would have to move left...to find Goldwater.
6
I am not ready to bury the Democratic Party quite yet Ross. Two-thirds of the counties contributing to US GDP voted for HRC. The issues are much more complex to define in 1500 characters here. The Democrats failed to talk about bread and butter issues in this election. Part of this weakness, that proved fatal was the standard-bearer herself. The conservatives talk as this election was a landslide and indeed it was not. In fact it looks like the gov of NC may change hands to a democrat in a state trump won but not by a large margin.
Ultimately since Lyndon Johnson the Democrats have been seen by most whites in this country as showering favoritism to minorities. The GOP and its significant control of many media outlets has done a meritorious job of convincing whites this is the case. In fact most of the policies shaped by democrats in the past half century, though not enacted, would go a long way to relieving white working class anxiety about the bread and butter issues that are on the table.
In obama the GOP and the right were masterful of stalling government for the last six years. The GOP has now become the Democratic Party of the 1930s, or at least that's what all these voters hope on Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin. The jury is out!
Ultimately since Lyndon Johnson the Democrats have been seen by most whites in this country as showering favoritism to minorities. The GOP and its significant control of many media outlets has done a meritorious job of convincing whites this is the case. In fact most of the policies shaped by democrats in the past half century, though not enacted, would go a long way to relieving white working class anxiety about the bread and butter issues that are on the table.
In obama the GOP and the right were masterful of stalling government for the last six years. The GOP has now become the Democratic Party of the 1930s, or at least that's what all these voters hope on Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin. The jury is out!
19
Maybe the Republicans can also move left on some issues. Stop demonizing non religious people. You do not need to go to church in order to be a good person. Work to make heath care better rather than insist on repeal. Help the dreamers while you work for a comprehensive immigration program. Remind people how many white folks are on welfare and disability, stop making it a race thing. Be willing to raise the money needed to make social security and Medicare work. Do not increase military spending but help the veterans we spend enough on guns.
5
Visualize a Trump victory without "the Donald." His campaign WAS his persona, with policies that did rouse his "deplorables"who were only a small part of those who voted for him. Others voted for Trumpism in spite of the insanity of his rabid boosters such as Alex Jones, one whose most fantastic conspiracy theories energize millions.
This "reality show" victory, was the opening for a vitalized right. ACA never could have realized its ideal of being a path for universal healthcare, not in a time when new treatments become assets for corporations who can charge a price that enriches investors, irrespective of the aggregate loss of benefit to those who can't afford them.
Left and Right may be no longer apply. The HRC campaign was as radical as was Trump's. Her focus was on empathy for what are small demographics, African Americans, Muslim Americans and women whose first identify is the women's movement. One example is the "mothers of the #blacklivesmatter movement at the convention including the Ferguson Mo. event. HRC's campaign ignored this, "The U.S. Department of Justice concluded that Wilson shot Brown in self-defense." While Trump become the "Law and Order" candidate, Clinton was defined by opposition to him, not rational solutions to major social issues.
The leadership is now supporting a DNC head whose background is the image of, and would be a continuation of her campaign. We are entering a new political era.
AlRodbell.com
This "reality show" victory, was the opening for a vitalized right. ACA never could have realized its ideal of being a path for universal healthcare, not in a time when new treatments become assets for corporations who can charge a price that enriches investors, irrespective of the aggregate loss of benefit to those who can't afford them.
Left and Right may be no longer apply. The HRC campaign was as radical as was Trump's. Her focus was on empathy for what are small demographics, African Americans, Muslim Americans and women whose first identify is the women's movement. One example is the "mothers of the #blacklivesmatter movement at the convention including the Ferguson Mo. event. HRC's campaign ignored this, "The U.S. Department of Justice concluded that Wilson shot Brown in self-defense." While Trump become the "Law and Order" candidate, Clinton was defined by opposition to him, not rational solutions to major social issues.
The leadership is now supporting a DNC head whose background is the image of, and would be a continuation of her campaign. We are entering a new political era.
AlRodbell.com
1
This column ignores some very real issues. 1. Voter suppression, a very real thing. 2. Some states not restoring voting rights to former convicts who have served their time. In Alabama, as one example, 30 percent of black men cannot vote. Quite sure if they could, Alabama politics would look quite different. 3. Gerrymandering. Let's not pretend that the Republican majorities in the House are the will of the people. Republicans have drawn favorable districts to assure their re-election. Republicans House members collectively receive millions fewer votes than Democratic House members, yet they have a majority. Does that make sense?
Democrats have winning issues on their side. In spite, this, though, you cannot compete with a candidate who, in so many words, has promised that he will restore white people to their rightful superior status in this society. Let's not pretend Trump's win was about ideals. The man's promises were empty. He's a huckster and people know it. Many are on board with this huckster--who likely use his office to pillage taxpayers and enrich himself--because he promises to perpetuate systemic racism and lift of the notion of white supremacy.
So, no, Democrats, can't move right. They'll ever out right the right wing and its clever, evolving Southern Strategy.
Democrats have winning issues on their side. In spite, this, though, you cannot compete with a candidate who, in so many words, has promised that he will restore white people to their rightful superior status in this society. Let's not pretend Trump's win was about ideals. The man's promises were empty. He's a huckster and people know it. Many are on board with this huckster--who likely use his office to pillage taxpayers and enrich himself--because he promises to perpetuate systemic racism and lift of the notion of white supremacy.
So, no, Democrats, can't move right. They'll ever out right the right wing and its clever, evolving Southern Strategy.
1
The voters got what they deserved, but within 2 years they may realize they were duped. The democrats will look very good by that time, particularly if they absorb the lessons Sanders taught them and aggressively do everything they can to make the donald a 1 term president.
3
What went wrong was the director of the nation's domestic intelligence and law enforcement service inserted late-in-the-cycle 'bad news' against one candidate. A 'free and fair' election was not possible after that point. This dirty trick pushed ALL of the late-deciders to the showman. The empty suit who has no idea of what good government means. The GOP, bless their hearts, will take the windfall.
[As a mental exercise, imagine AG Lynch announcing that a US Attorney in Florida or New York was convening a grand jury to investigate if indictments should ensue from the multiple charges of sexual assault? Could a fair election be held after that?]
Any attempt to come up with broad brush change in Democratic message, motives or outreach is misspent, imo. The loss - 228,000 in four states out of 22 million cast is too small to have one cause or one fix. Certainly a move toward 'Republican Lite' is not the proper thing to do.
As a voter, I need assurance that illegal interference in elections by government agencies will not be tolerated - Comey should be fired - and that the integrity of the ballot is certain. Assurances (the WI, MI and PA recounts) that no hanky-panky was used to turn the election electronically. (BREXIT, FARC peace treaty and Trump's election make it easy to believe that there is tampering.) Lastly, I would hope for equitable access to the ballot but it is not something I expect from President Trump and the GOP band of "We got ours...Try and get yours."
[As a mental exercise, imagine AG Lynch announcing that a US Attorney in Florida or New York was convening a grand jury to investigate if indictments should ensue from the multiple charges of sexual assault? Could a fair election be held after that?]
Any attempt to come up with broad brush change in Democratic message, motives or outreach is misspent, imo. The loss - 228,000 in four states out of 22 million cast is too small to have one cause or one fix. Certainly a move toward 'Republican Lite' is not the proper thing to do.
As a voter, I need assurance that illegal interference in elections by government agencies will not be tolerated - Comey should be fired - and that the integrity of the ballot is certain. Assurances (the WI, MI and PA recounts) that no hanky-panky was used to turn the election electronically. (BREXIT, FARC peace treaty and Trump's election make it easy to believe that there is tampering.) Lastly, I would hope for equitable access to the ballot but it is not something I expect from President Trump and the GOP band of "We got ours...Try and get yours."
4
Democrats do not need to move right. I believe we should stay left of center. We need younger and more charismatic candidates running for office at all levels. We need to offer viable alternatives to the right. Maybe Trump will help working class people and the middle class. We will have to wait and see. If he doesn't follow through with permanent solutions that address the growing inequality of wealth in the nation, this rightward movement will be temporary.
The GOP, on the other hand, has not helped the working class people in a long time. We have a GOP Congress. We have many GOP controlled states. They will continue to dismantle the federal and state government as they have been doing for decades. They will continue to destroy institutions and agencies and services that assist the poor and the middle class. Sooner or later they are going to break the camel's back.
The GOP, on the other hand, has not helped the working class people in a long time. We have a GOP Congress. We have many GOP controlled states. They will continue to dismantle the federal and state government as they have been doing for decades. They will continue to destroy institutions and agencies and services that assist the poor and the middle class. Sooner or later they are going to break the camel's back.
5
Move right?
That has been the main reason for this mess in the first place!
That has been the main reason for this mess in the first place!
9
Calm down, Ross.
Literally a month ago, columnists and pundits were wondering aloud how the Republican party would survive the next few months as it stared over the precipice at its imminent destruction.
A few weeks later, we see the same sharp divide in the country that existed before, and if Donald Trump and the Republican party was honorable, it would recognize that, having far from a mandate, it is only right to construct a government of moderates and populists both, to reflect where the country really currently stands. Instead, we are getting a far-right wing oligarchy. What say you on that? That is where you should be directing your attention. Your party is on the verge of ending the great experiment in democracy the USA has undertaken. What are your sagacious suggestions for your own leaders?
Literally a month ago, columnists and pundits were wondering aloud how the Republican party would survive the next few months as it stared over the precipice at its imminent destruction.
A few weeks later, we see the same sharp divide in the country that existed before, and if Donald Trump and the Republican party was honorable, it would recognize that, having far from a mandate, it is only right to construct a government of moderates and populists both, to reflect where the country really currently stands. Instead, we are getting a far-right wing oligarchy. What say you on that? That is where you should be directing your attention. Your party is on the verge of ending the great experiment in democracy the USA has undertaken. What are your sagacious suggestions for your own leaders?
7
Dumb & reductionistic. The election taught us about shallow branding & sales/smear tactics...not substantive policy, not Hayek or the appeal of nativism.
The Democrats need a harder message, more butch, with unifying themes- jobs for everyone. Defending minority rights, choice, equality are essential principles. Defending the role of government to balance the Market, protect the environment, oversee & regulate for the public good- this must be fought for.
The lesson of this shocking loss may be exploited or rationalized. Surely the Cyber thugs, domestic & foreign are new threats to a civil process, but marketing and TV Q is now king.
Progressives must stop wild internecine petulant snarky attacks on eachother and fight by running for local office, state government- not running in the streets. Occupy must occupy elected office; BLM must make votes matter; Bernie bros must expand their fervor and support progressive Senate positions effectively.
And it is probably not wise to put Keith Ellison- a superb congressman- to head the DNC where a full time job awaits a pragmatist.
The Democrats need a harder message, more butch, with unifying themes- jobs for everyone. Defending minority rights, choice, equality are essential principles. Defending the role of government to balance the Market, protect the environment, oversee & regulate for the public good- this must be fought for.
The lesson of this shocking loss may be exploited or rationalized. Surely the Cyber thugs, domestic & foreign are new threats to a civil process, but marketing and TV Q is now king.
Progressives must stop wild internecine petulant snarky attacks on eachother and fight by running for local office, state government- not running in the streets. Occupy must occupy elected office; BLM must make votes matter; Bernie bros must expand their fervor and support progressive Senate positions effectively.
And it is probably not wise to put Keith Ellison- a superb congressman- to head the DNC where a full time job awaits a pragmatist.
5
Trump promised unfunded socialism and that's what he will do, explode the deficits and distort the free market. He is the opposite of a conservative.
8
Move to the Right!? Seriously? How far to the Right would you like us to meekly move? To the 1950s? The 1880s? How about the lovely 1850s when slavery was so popular? Or would you be content if we just abolished such things as women and African Americans voting? The only nations on our planet that are working well at the moment are the Nordic Lands which are far, far to the Left. Those nations have people that feel safe and are safe, people who are happy and productive, people who don't have to cow-tow to rich overlords. I will fight against Trump and the restrictive, authoritarian Right that doesn't believe in safety nets or the Rights of the People! And so will everyone that I know.
6
To the right? We've been to the right since Bill Clinton, Hillary and Obama! And had a handful of people in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania voted Dem, or we finally dumped the electoral college, we'd be talking about how the country is moving left??? What is needed is to stop giving these small rural states such power in presidential elections. The majority of US citizens do NOT want to move right. The electoral college is anti-democracy and always has been.
5
This pushing noodles around about what the Democrats need to do in terms of ideas and policy is a bunch of hooey. It is a media obsession and, for Douthat, lots of fun.
Both major political parties ignored for several decades the hollowing out of a lot of America's heartland. Until this year, the Republicans sold their followers on following along with the potential for cultural regression to an early time where people went to church on Sunday, families had dinner together every night and good girls waited until they were 34 to loose their virginity. In 2016, the Republicans got a bigly wake up call from the Donald.
The Democrats, first of all, need a better candidates than they had this year or in 2000 or 2004. They needed a candidate who could counterpunch and who wasn't identified with yesterday and long ago.
Meanwhile, the Dems need to first analyze the game they are playing and figure out if they want to join the Republicans in the big leagues. The GOP is fighting against them on a multi-level, multi-dimensional way, just like some vast. interactive video game. The Dems are still playing Pong, that long ago electronic paddle game. The Democrats have allowed themselves to be eaten alive by right wing media, endless dirty trick rumors and an ocean of billionaire spending.
One of the best things for the Dems would be for the Republicans to implement more of what they say they want. Then, the voters in 2018 and 2020 would have a change of heart, big league.
Both major political parties ignored for several decades the hollowing out of a lot of America's heartland. Until this year, the Republicans sold their followers on following along with the potential for cultural regression to an early time where people went to church on Sunday, families had dinner together every night and good girls waited until they were 34 to loose their virginity. In 2016, the Republicans got a bigly wake up call from the Donald.
The Democrats, first of all, need a better candidates than they had this year or in 2000 or 2004. They needed a candidate who could counterpunch and who wasn't identified with yesterday and long ago.
Meanwhile, the Dems need to first analyze the game they are playing and figure out if they want to join the Republicans in the big leagues. The GOP is fighting against them on a multi-level, multi-dimensional way, just like some vast. interactive video game. The Dems are still playing Pong, that long ago electronic paddle game. The Democrats have allowed themselves to be eaten alive by right wing media, endless dirty trick rumors and an ocean of billionaire spending.
One of the best things for the Dems would be for the Republicans to implement more of what they say they want. Then, the voters in 2018 and 2020 would have a change of heart, big league.
2
Angela Merkel, a German conservative, would be in the left wing of the Democratic Party in the United States. American politics is already so far to the right, but conservatives won't be satisfied until we turn the clock back to the 1950's.
5
While I agree that the Democratic party should shift some of its emphasis to programs that help working people, of all ethnicities, genders and orientations, the recent spate of graffiti, attacks, vandalism etc. in the name of xenophobia, homophobia and misogyny clearly illustrate that the fight for civil rights and equality is nowhere near won.
1
I suppose if all one cares about is winning, then becoming more right could be the correct move for the Democrats. But if VALUES (of which the right so endlessly proclaims itself the embodiment,protector, and purveyor) are of concern, , then perhaps the Democrats should move to the Left. I say "to the left," rather than "further to the left," because they are so far right now I'm sure they have no idea what their left hand is doing. This is a central and not much discussed issue in the U.S. - how the spectrum has shifted rightward over the last 40 years, so that what is now defined as moderate right would, some time ago,have been seen as quite radical, even beyond the pale, and what is left is barely recognizable as such, but is more a paler shade of right. Go left, Democrats! I say. You have nothing to lose but loss itself.
Democrats have been moving right for years. Everytime they do, the GOP goes farther right. How about if you move left, Ross?
5
Excuse me but I believe it is your party that has been taken over by a man that spews racist, xenophobic, misogynistic words not to mention outrageous lies almost every time he opens his mouth. Perhaps you might want to tend to the mote in your eye before helping us out with the speck in ours.
6
You seem to touch on much of the issues that contributed to the power shift in the US. However your omission of second amendment rights is a complete misunderstanding of the white blue collar sentiment mid America is not the coastal community.
2
HRC, JS, and unhappy Sanders voters who stayed home got nearly 7% more voters' backing than DT did.
Most voters back keeping NAFTA, ACA, the Iran deal, moves to normalize Mexican immigrants' status, the wind-down of ME wars, women's rights, minority rights, Medicare and Medicaid, Social Security, re-regulating of banking, taxation on the 1%, infrastructure renovation, and ensuring educational and job opportunities. Now what makes Douthat think they'd rather go Rightwing and adopt the platform DT is spinning away from faster every day? Could it be that RD really doesn't want the Dems to be Dems, but to shut up and join Sessions, Pence, DeVos in reducing and drowning the federal guv'mint so the Olde South May Rise Again, with "states rights", "interposition", and racist politics? Or does he just want every duck in a row, in a Douthatian paradise -- theologically and politically? "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds." A thoroughly American notion...
Most voters back keeping NAFTA, ACA, the Iran deal, moves to normalize Mexican immigrants' status, the wind-down of ME wars, women's rights, minority rights, Medicare and Medicaid, Social Security, re-regulating of banking, taxation on the 1%, infrastructure renovation, and ensuring educational and job opportunities. Now what makes Douthat think they'd rather go Rightwing and adopt the platform DT is spinning away from faster every day? Could it be that RD really doesn't want the Dems to be Dems, but to shut up and join Sessions, Pence, DeVos in reducing and drowning the federal guv'mint so the Olde South May Rise Again, with "states rights", "interposition", and racist politics? Or does he just want every duck in a row, in a Douthatian paradise -- theologically and politically? "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds." A thoroughly American notion...
2
Give me a break. If Democrats want to remain irrelevant forever they should follow this advice of their stated opponent.
This is a recipe for disaster. The greatest failures of the Democrats have been led by their right wing (the Clintonites), whose push for Republican light policies completely lost the party base. There is no way this party can out-right the GOP.
And more to the point, trying to do so would be a disaster for this country and the world. We need a party that genuinely stands for the working class. That means pushing forward policies diametrically opposed to the slavishly pro-capitalist wing of the party. If the Clintonites and the Cuomos can't deal with that, they're welcome to back the GOP. But for every one right wing loss, the Democrats would regain two working class votes that defected to Trump.
I don't want to live in a country (or a world) in which the only choice is between right-wing, liberal, flag-waving capitalists and fascists. But it seems that this is the dream world of most of our corporately-owned "journalists" and editors.
This is a recipe for disaster. The greatest failures of the Democrats have been led by their right wing (the Clintonites), whose push for Republican light policies completely lost the party base. There is no way this party can out-right the GOP.
And more to the point, trying to do so would be a disaster for this country and the world. We need a party that genuinely stands for the working class. That means pushing forward policies diametrically opposed to the slavishly pro-capitalist wing of the party. If the Clintonites and the Cuomos can't deal with that, they're welcome to back the GOP. But for every one right wing loss, the Democrats would regain two working class votes that defected to Trump.
I don't want to live in a country (or a world) in which the only choice is between right-wing, liberal, flag-waving capitalists and fascists. But it seems that this is the dream world of most of our corporately-owned "journalists" and editors.
2
Why would the Dems even consider moving right when HRC received 2.5M more votes that Trump? No, moving right -- nee, moving white -- is not the answer. If and when the GOP adopts Obama's infrastructure bill and calls it their own, there will be no reason whatsoever to consider such a move.
1
There has already been a take over of the Democratic Party by corporate conservatives - first the DLC then the 3rd way and it did give us Presidents Clinton and Obama and in bears the majority of the blame for Mr. Trump.
Yes there is a Tea Party base that supports the Regressive agenda, but the numbers of White, suburban women as well as men who voted for Mr. Trump or did not cast a vote for either made the difference in the electoral college votes.
As Harry Truman said “If a voter has a choice between a Republican and a Democrat who acts like a Republican, he’ll vote for the Republican every time.” http://www.utne.com/pub/2003_115/features/
Yes there is a Tea Party base that supports the Regressive agenda, but the numbers of White, suburban women as well as men who voted for Mr. Trump or did not cast a vote for either made the difference in the electoral college votes.
As Harry Truman said “If a voter has a choice between a Republican and a Democrat who acts like a Republican, he’ll vote for the Republican every time.” http://www.utne.com/pub/2003_115/features/
2
No, the Democrats cannot move left. The outcome of this election is not that the right won, it is that the right voted. There are millions of Americans who did not vote in this election because they felt that Hillary Clinton was not left enough. It is a mistake not to understand and recognize the strength of the support for Bernie Sanders platform. What is needed is new leadership (a new party) that takes into consideration the needs of the average citizens whether they are politically on the right or the left. The rich will continue to get richer under Donald Trump, and for the rest of us life will continue to get more challenging. This paradigm of division according to political party needs to stop, it distracts us and only service the corporations.
Ross you are conflating the abandonment of an admittedly failed policy (attempting to supplant identity politics with an appeal to the country as a whole) with moving rightward. This is fallacious.
Trump wasn't elected because the country wanted someone who was to the right of Obama. They elected him despite his lack of adherence to what has been the standard platform of the right for decades. No more foreign wars. No international trade. Strengthening entitlements. Huge infrastructure spending. Most of these ideas are anathema to the right in the US.
The reason Trump won is because this was a change year - voters were sick of the freeze in Washington. And instead of selecting a fiery leftist who called out the idiocy of politics as usual, they selected a fiery rightist populist who called out the idiocy of politics as usual. Nobody should have been surprised at Trump's win when the democrats' offering was a 70 year old woman whose whole career has been as a Washington insider.
Trump wasn't elected because the country wanted someone who was to the right of Obama. They elected him despite his lack of adherence to what has been the standard platform of the right for decades. No more foreign wars. No international trade. Strengthening entitlements. Huge infrastructure spending. Most of these ideas are anathema to the right in the US.
The reason Trump won is because this was a change year - voters were sick of the freeze in Washington. And instead of selecting a fiery leftist who called out the idiocy of politics as usual, they selected a fiery rightist populist who called out the idiocy of politics as usual. Nobody should have been surprised at Trump's win when the democrats' offering was a 70 year old woman whose whole career has been as a Washington insider.
4
Somewhere in the center (or just left or right thereof) is the place to be in all democracies that have any chance of working--or perhaps even lasting. Extremism of all varieties only breeds more extremism. The far left meets the far right at the edges and only serve to validate one another. Ideologues bring the goose-steppers whatever the color of their shirts.
4
Never take advice from people that are always wrong.
Trump won the electoral college by being a racist and a bigot, and promising very non right wing actions on entitlements and jobs. It allowed him to win the electoral votes of three reliable Democratic strongholds by very narrow margins.
Trump lost the majority of voting Americans because he's a racist, bigot, and a lunatic.
It's going to be a really long four to eight years of corruption, stupid policies and worse. The Democrats should do absolutely nothing to cooperate with Trump, and they should not take worthless advice from Mr. Douthat.
Trump won the electoral college by being a racist and a bigot, and promising very non right wing actions on entitlements and jobs. It allowed him to win the electoral votes of three reliable Democratic strongholds by very narrow margins.
Trump lost the majority of voting Americans because he's a racist, bigot, and a lunatic.
It's going to be a really long four to eight years of corruption, stupid policies and worse. The Democrats should do absolutely nothing to cooperate with Trump, and they should not take worthless advice from Mr. Douthat.
2
This column is nonsense. The incoming administration has already presented the Democrats with the perfect way to win back blue collar workers. The plan to turn Medicare into a (likely inadequate) voucher program for seniors to buy private insurance is a terrible idea both practically and politically. The Democrats should already be making this their number one issue and should already be running TV ads against it.
4
Can the Democrats move right? At a time when we have no working example of moderate politics, "moving right" sounds more like abandonment of our Democratic principles than pragmatic compromise. You'll need a far more compelling case to convince me.
Democrats have a very difficult challenge. They can’t simply shift to the right, because shifting to the right would be a selling out of their principles. They are very willing to compromise, but not on basic human rights. And, there is no need to compromise on the things that do not need compromising on such as unregulated or illegal immigration, undeserved entitlements, etc. – they already agree that these are not good. They can’t fight lies with lies because this is not part of their moral fiber. So, when a candidate, or PACs, or a news station, or talk radio shows, or newspapers, or extreme right fake news mills, or any number of other mechanisms that produce false information or outright lies proliferate to the Right’s advantage, the only counter measure the Democrats have is to continue to be honest and truthful. Sounds pious, I get it. But, Democrats simply can’t and won’t fight fire with fire, or lies with lies. They will have to work harder at getting their message out and developing more visible and impactful leaders. This hasn’t happened partly because there has been a sense of less threat – things were moving in more progressive direction. But, now there is a serious threat, and you can bet that leadership will rise. And so the pendulum already begins to swing – I just hope fast enough to save us, because there will be no shifting to the right from truth and integrity. I’ll suffer through our current misery before I’ll compromise my principles.
3
Sometimes I feel that you are living in a bubble with no prior knowledge of the Republic. The Democratic Party has already played with moving to the right, it was called the Clinton Administration. They leaned over backwards ( sorry rightwards ) to the GOP and passed a GOP Crime Bill, a GOP Drug War Bill, a GOP Welfare Reform Bill and the jewel of course was the GOP NAFTA Treaty. What did Billary get for their obsequiesness ? They got countless investigations, were accused of murder and then Bill was impeached.
All this while Newt Gingrich was doing "contracts with America" and shutting down the government.
What the Democratic Party must do is move to the left and then educate the voters on how this is a good thing. They must offset the ignorance generated by the GOP and the news media who totally have no idea how expanded government is probably the answer to many of our problems.
All this while Newt Gingrich was doing "contracts with America" and shutting down the government.
What the Democratic Party must do is move to the left and then educate the voters on how this is a good thing. They must offset the ignorance generated by the GOP and the news media who totally have no idea how expanded government is probably the answer to many of our problems.
3
Douhat and Brooks love to walk the philosophical gardens of these pages talking about political parties and the meaning the Donald's rise. And now the Dems fall from grace.
Like most other pundits on these pages they willfully ignore the seminal event of my lifetime as an American-the thoroughly documented and over-the-top upward redistribution of wealth. The power wielded by these relatively new economic elites shades everything Americans see, feel, and hear.
The evisceration of the middle class has relegated millions to an economic place where hope barely exists. What was once a thriving factory worker class is now a permanent underclass. Their anger, and Clinton's inability to address it, fueled the emergence of the Grifter-in-Chief.
The battle that plays out across our political landscape is funded by those with money. And framed by a propaganda that constantly intrudes into our lives. As Obama said in the New Yorker, if he watched Fox News he wouldn't have voted for him.
So pretending that successful economic warfare on a large segment of the population comes with no consequences is a remarkable point of view.
For the better part of two generations living wage factory jobs have been ripped away from good, decent, hard working people.
That they would have voted for someone who implied he could give them those jobs back should come as no surprise.
Suggesting that the Democrats therefore have to move to the center just seems politically obtuse.
Like most other pundits on these pages they willfully ignore the seminal event of my lifetime as an American-the thoroughly documented and over-the-top upward redistribution of wealth. The power wielded by these relatively new economic elites shades everything Americans see, feel, and hear.
The evisceration of the middle class has relegated millions to an economic place where hope barely exists. What was once a thriving factory worker class is now a permanent underclass. Their anger, and Clinton's inability to address it, fueled the emergence of the Grifter-in-Chief.
The battle that plays out across our political landscape is funded by those with money. And framed by a propaganda that constantly intrudes into our lives. As Obama said in the New Yorker, if he watched Fox News he wouldn't have voted for him.
So pretending that successful economic warfare on a large segment of the population comes with no consequences is a remarkable point of view.
For the better part of two generations living wage factory jobs have been ripped away from good, decent, hard working people.
That they would have voted for someone who implied he could give them those jobs back should come as no surprise.
Suggesting that the Democrats therefore have to move to the center just seems politically obtuse.
6
The Democrats "move right" would only confirm their isolation in establishment limbo. The real question is can they move left to claim that part of the Sanders wing that voted for Trump. Therein lie their principles which they've abandoned.
1
Apparently Mr. Douthat has been so focused on criticizing the Pope that he has not noticed that the Democratic Party has already moved far to the right. This is a primary reason why Sanders drew so much energy and enthusiasm, and this is why a well known and respected Democratic candidate lost to a narcissistic sociopath, something that would have been impossible had the Democratic party actually stood for traditional Democratic values, rather than simply representing Wall Street, Health Insurers, and Oligarchs: i.e., GOP-lite.
2
Democrats have been moving right ever since Reagan. To put it plainly, fat lot of good it has done for any of us. Democrat or Republican.
Obama bent over backwards, away from his base to try to work with the Republicans and what did they do? Swarm and disrupt town hall meetings, block judicial nominees, party directed gerrymandering in the states, destroy as much as possible and stall the rest.
It's time for the right to allow people to move to the center, so that government can work again.
We have become a dangerously far right country and I for one, am not the least bit comfortable of anything moving more right.
Perhaps it would be more productive to determine once and for all the difference between conservative and far right and as well the difference between liberal and progressive.
Conservatives and Progressives could probably work together. Far right and liberals are too entrenched in ideology and tribalism to move us out of the mess we have created for ourselves.
But I fear that this new presidency will make my argument moot, I think we are going to be fighting for our lives, rights and any hope of prosperity all too soon.
Obama bent over backwards, away from his base to try to work with the Republicans and what did they do? Swarm and disrupt town hall meetings, block judicial nominees, party directed gerrymandering in the states, destroy as much as possible and stall the rest.
It's time for the right to allow people to move to the center, so that government can work again.
We have become a dangerously far right country and I for one, am not the least bit comfortable of anything moving more right.
Perhaps it would be more productive to determine once and for all the difference between conservative and far right and as well the difference between liberal and progressive.
Conservatives and Progressives could probably work together. Far right and liberals are too entrenched in ideology and tribalism to move us out of the mess we have created for ourselves.
But I fear that this new presidency will make my argument moot, I think we are going to be fighting for our lives, rights and any hope of prosperity all too soon.
5
Politics is not a one dimensional social science. Not everything can be quantified on a liberal-conservative scale. Hillary wasn't a liberal, she was a centrist. Most importantly, she was an establishment candidate and a corporatist. And honestly? Donald Trump isn't a real conservative. Outside of the pandering to his white Christian base, he's basically a repudiation of everything Republicans have become over the last two decades. But he was an anti-establishment outsider, and that appealed to people. Standing next to HRC's baggage, that was a significant reason for his electoral victory.
But Sanders? We'll he's more left than Hillary. *Far* more left. But he's also a populist -- a common thread that ran through Trump's campaign. He also stayed away from the identity politics which alienated white voters in swing states and polarized much of the cycle. Most importantly? About 50% of the country approved of him, while fewer than 40% disapproved. People *liked* the SuperPAC-less grandpa with a history of fighting for social justice and focus on policy reform, and he would have swept the floor with Trump regardless of the liberal/conservative or left/right split.
So the better question is this: *should* the Democrats move right?
The answer, quite simply, is no.
But Sanders? We'll he's more left than Hillary. *Far* more left. But he's also a populist -- a common thread that ran through Trump's campaign. He also stayed away from the identity politics which alienated white voters in swing states and polarized much of the cycle. Most importantly? About 50% of the country approved of him, while fewer than 40% disapproved. People *liked* the SuperPAC-less grandpa with a history of fighting for social justice and focus on policy reform, and he would have swept the floor with Trump regardless of the liberal/conservative or left/right split.
So the better question is this: *should* the Democrats move right?
The answer, quite simply, is no.
1
Can Democrats move to the right from Hillary or Obama? No, a couple more steps to the right and they would be moderate Republicans.
Does the MSM tell the truth? Mostly, but we cannot make people believe it.
Is the electoral college and gerrymandering skewing the outcomes? Yes.
Will the fake stream media continue to drown out fact-based media? Trump's twitter feed needs to be ignored. It is a megaphone for many baseline opinions. He'll start getting some reality-based pushback once he start his new job.
So
Does the MSM tell the truth? Mostly, but we cannot make people believe it.
Is the electoral college and gerrymandering skewing the outcomes? Yes.
Will the fake stream media continue to drown out fact-based media? Trump's twitter feed needs to be ignored. It is a megaphone for many baseline opinions. He'll start getting some reality-based pushback once he start his new job.
So
"Without backing away from their support for same-sex marriage and legal abortion". This "support" consists of persuading friendly judges to remove these issues from democratic control, which in turn implies that liberals do not have popular support on these issues. During the campaign it appears that voters who would normally despise Trump voted for him any way so that he would appoint judges who would return these issues to democratic control. This might have cost Democrats the election. Was it worth it?
1
It's already the party of the Reagan Revolution. How much more right does it need to go?
Ronald Reagan talked about kicking folks off of Welfare; Bill Clinton actually did it. Reagan talked about deregulating the banks; Clinton actually did it. Reagan talked about locking up African Americans by the millions; Bill Clinton actually did it. Clinton sent our jobs overseas so that corporate executives could optimize their profits.
Chuck Schumer recently appointed Bill Manchin to a senior position in coal, all but insuring the Democratic party will take no action on climate change. The Democratic Party is the party of the Reagan Revolution.
Ronald Reagan talked about kicking folks off of Welfare; Bill Clinton actually did it. Reagan talked about deregulating the banks; Clinton actually did it. Reagan talked about locking up African Americans by the millions; Bill Clinton actually did it. Clinton sent our jobs overseas so that corporate executives could optimize their profits.
Chuck Schumer recently appointed Bill Manchin to a senior position in coal, all but insuring the Democratic party will take no action on climate change. The Democratic Party is the party of the Reagan Revolution.
5
The Dems _did_ move right, going with Clinton, not Sanders.
That's why they lost.
That's why they lost.
6
Don't take the bait Dems. This leftward drift Ross talks of still has Obama to the right of Ronald Regan. Polling supports just about all of the ideals that Democrats have. From gay marriage, equal pay for women, background checks, immigration reform, banking reform, healthcare reform, leaving social security and medicare in place, staying out of foreign wars, legalization of marijuana, prison industrial complex reform. When asked separately, voters support all of these - when tied together and presented as a Democratic platform they don't. Why? Cause the Democratic party is weak. Its paid to lose. It doesn't know how to fight. It has great ideas, but no idea how to implement. That Trump can save half of the jobs (perhaps up to 1000) for Carrier workers, and then have the NYT headline it while Obama didn't even try is just today's example. And its not that much of a victory for Trump. 1000 jobs are still being lost, but its spun as 1000 saved!
The Democrats are like a fisherman sitting on the bank of a stocked pond with the best lures, strongest line, smoothest reel, sharpest hooks but still can't catch fish. Presentation counts. Technique counts. Finesse counts. Dems have none of this and waste the tools they have.
The Democrats are like a fisherman sitting on the bank of a stocked pond with the best lures, strongest line, smoothest reel, sharpest hooks but still can't catch fish. Presentation counts. Technique counts. Finesse counts. Dems have none of this and waste the tools they have.
6
If Trump can deliver on even some of his stump promises, that will be a circumstance that forces the Dems right. If his presidency turns out to be business-as-usual and a swing-and-a-miss on jobs creation, then Warren is up next.
I'd rather lose a thousand times and still call myself a Democrat: there is no sin in supporting a party that tries to divide the pie more evenly, and who in the eyes of the world still stands up for those who have no voice. This election is not a reflection on the weakness of the Democratic party and ideals; it is a reflection of a population which no longer can tell truth from lies, and who are willing to accept lies over truth as long as you tell them that everything is going to be all right because a billionaire is now in charge.
5
Good suggestions, Ross. But, sadly, the Democrat Party can't do it. It has drunk the elixir of so-called social justice equality and it cannot hide its contempt for those who question that ideology.
2
The NYT pick of the BurblaveResident's comment on this article is the most revealing of the reality of the Democratic Party's dilemma. We are a Republic and the Constitution upon which it is based was promulgated by folks who did not believe in "One man one vote". The Republican elite have picked up on this point big time by realizing that the Democratic strength is in just a few parts of the country and mainly in the big cities. The great compromise giving the small States equal representation in the Senate will never be changed.
I am amused that there are so many comments about Hillary winning the popular vote(due to California voters). When the popular vote has zero effect on the electoral vote for President and never will. No Amendment for this change will ever get a three fourths approval from the States. Again we are a Republic and the Republicans seem to have that in their name. The only hope for the demographic changes the Democrats need is for the vast majority of their African American and Latino voters to disperse themselves more evenly among the States, a very remote possibility indeed.
I am amused that there are so many comments about Hillary winning the popular vote(due to California voters). When the popular vote has zero effect on the electoral vote for President and never will. No Amendment for this change will ever get a three fourths approval from the States. Again we are a Republic and the Republicans seem to have that in their name. The only hope for the demographic changes the Democrats need is for the vast majority of their African American and Latino voters to disperse themselves more evenly among the States, a very remote possibility indeed.
1
Mr. Douthat is trying to finesse an "I told you so" column when he was, in fact, dead set against Trump's election. Oh, the hypocrisy!
If you're going to finger wag at any political party start with your own, thank you.
In 5-10 years Texas will be blue state, we just need to wait.
If you're going to finger wag at any political party start with your own, thank you.
In 5-10 years Texas will be blue state, we just need to wait.
3
What the Democratic party needs to do is to include all of the working class, including those of the Silicon Valley persuasion, in a broad economically-based tent, rather than the narrowly-based tent of identity politics, at the same time attending to constitutionally-based needs of “identity” groups.
1
And while they're at it, they could put a little more distance between themselves and Wall St. Electing Chuck Schumer (D-NY) as their leader in the Senate was not the the way to do this, but wise political calculations have not been the hallmark of the Democrats this year.
2
Today it is very difficult to read this article, given that it is chock full of Republican talking points about the horror of having to treat people like human beings. The Democratic Party fails because it is a centre right corporate party like the republicans used to be. This article is a re hash of the corporate agenda as normalizing theft of the commons and a vast private media with no commitment to truth. Mr. Douthat?
6
"That would mean no more fines for Catholic charities and hospitals, no more transgender-bathroom directives handed down from the White House to local schools, and restraint rather than ruthlessness in future debates over funding and accreditation for conservative religious schools."
Douthat is repeating the Bannon-Breitbart drivel that the transgender bathroom law was Obama's doing (it was GOP Gov. McCrory, who lost his re-election bid).
Paid GOP posters are now positing that Obama introduced a law to force men and women to use the same loo.
Corporate welfare is bad enough. If we allow church welfare to expand even further in direct attack of the separation of church and state (thank W. for that), the country will go broke. Churches raise enough money to buy television networks, cable stations, Manhattan properties, the country's largest health care systems, and, well, gold-plated bathtubs for their flock (there's the "dependence and stagnation," Mr. Douthat). If Catholicism were (officially) a corporation, it has been estimated to be the 20th largest in the world in terms of sheer wealth.
The Democratic Party got complacent and abandoned labor unions and much of the middle class for Wall Street and Goldman Sachs. The Party needs to go back to the left where it came from and where it belongs - protecting all the nobodies who actually work for a living.
Douthat is repeating the Bannon-Breitbart drivel that the transgender bathroom law was Obama's doing (it was GOP Gov. McCrory, who lost his re-election bid).
Paid GOP posters are now positing that Obama introduced a law to force men and women to use the same loo.
Corporate welfare is bad enough. If we allow church welfare to expand even further in direct attack of the separation of church and state (thank W. for that), the country will go broke. Churches raise enough money to buy television networks, cable stations, Manhattan properties, the country's largest health care systems, and, well, gold-plated bathtubs for their flock (there's the "dependence and stagnation," Mr. Douthat). If Catholicism were (officially) a corporation, it has been estimated to be the 20th largest in the world in terms of sheer wealth.
The Democratic Party got complacent and abandoned labor unions and much of the middle class for Wall Street and Goldman Sachs. The Party needs to go back to the left where it came from and where it belongs - protecting all the nobodies who actually work for a living.
10
Democrats do not have to move right, they need to do what's right not the politically correct thing. If people are racist or sexist or whatever, pay no attention they are just a few nuts. They make everything into everyone out side NYC, LA, Phila, Boston is a racist, sexist antigay homophobe. If you were from Europe you would thing everyone outside the east and west coast is a murder. The dems want to take away your right to own guns. How many hunters and target shooters have killed people not many. So, perhaps they should in force the gun laws they have in the big cities, and leave everyone else alone. Make it a crime to be a member of a gang, how about do that the dems love new laws the more laws the better right dems.
2
Although Ross' points make sense, they are but fringe items that will not stir fire in voters. What the Dems really need to do is simply go after Big Pharma. Speak with fire and brimstone about enforcing uniform drug pricing to all people, worldwide. So everyone's drugs become affordable. That will get people to rally around Dems. This is one issue that stirs all voters, not just big city liberals.
1
Look at what is happening in the Labour Party in the UK - a lot of similarities.
You need to understand the economy is radically broken. You can use both left and right policies to come up with a radical new way of running politics. But it has to be radically different. You must vocalize the poverty -it is way worse than statistics tell you. You must come up with real economic solutions -cheap one's -and urgently prepare for climate change.
You need to understand the economy is radically broken. You can use both left and right policies to come up with a radical new way of running politics. But it has to be radically different. You must vocalize the poverty -it is way worse than statistics tell you. You must come up with real economic solutions -cheap one's -and urgently prepare for climate change.
The Democrats have moved so far right that their biggest initiative in the Obama years- the ACA- was originally dreamed up by the AEI and their last candidate for President is basically inline with with the country club republicans of yore.
So a silly editorial from Douthat.
So a silly editorial from Douthat.
3
Ross, I don't see the Dems moving in any of these directions. They are against traditional religion and morality, and they are aghast at the idea that America was ever good or great.
The ideal party platform that would sweep America in large majorities would be 1) pro-religion, pro traditional morality, 2) protecting American interests firsts when it comes to war or work, and 3) caring for the poor and helping them advance through education and work opportunities.
This is the party that does not exist in America today, but the one I think would carry a large majority of Americans. This could be the direction that future Republicans go; it may be the direction that Trump goes since it is the most logical coalition of ideas and the one that will win most American hearts.
The ideal party platform that would sweep America in large majorities would be 1) pro-religion, pro traditional morality, 2) protecting American interests firsts when it comes to war or work, and 3) caring for the poor and helping them advance through education and work opportunities.
This is the party that does not exist in America today, but the one I think would carry a large majority of Americans. This could be the direction that future Republicans go; it may be the direction that Trump goes since it is the most logical coalition of ideas and the one that will win most American hearts.
3
Trump and other Republicans won this round because Trump's racist message brought the racist voters to the polls in a few key states. . There are no policy issues involved. Very few voters support the Republican agendas to privatize Social Security, voucherize Medicare and while there is some support for severely cutting the social safety net, it's not a majority opinion. Having an aggressive foreign policy may also not have a majority after the Iraq war debacle. Once President Obama is gone from office, white fears will lessen and the Democrat coalition will reform. As far as culture war issues, there is no majority support for outlawing abortion.
1
Can Republicans move toward reality instead of fantasy, i.e. lies? Does Ross realize that the Democrat got over 2 million more votes than the Republican (or whatever he is)?
2
The Democratic Party definitely needs to shift its ideological center, but that shift must be leftward, not rightward.
As our support for American labor has waned, so has our electoral support, particularly at the state level. This may be the largest single factor (beyond the gullibility of those who believed in right-wing and Russian dissemination of disinformation) that resulted in the tragic outcome of this election.
Had we not rigged our nominating process and permitted other candidates to competitively vie for the Democratic nomination, we might be in a very different and more hopeful position today. There are any number of Democrats who would not have carried Hillary's baggage into the election, foremost among whom were Joe Biden and Liz Warren, but even had we nominated Bernie Sanders I believe he would have won by cutting Trump's blue-collar support right out from under him.
With Hillary, we shot ourselves not in the foot but in the heart. We need to remember our great liberal and libertarian (with a lower-case "L") traditions in the Democratic Party and regain our pride in our great accomplishments. The LAST thing we need to do is to become Republican Lite.
As our support for American labor has waned, so has our electoral support, particularly at the state level. This may be the largest single factor (beyond the gullibility of those who believed in right-wing and Russian dissemination of disinformation) that resulted in the tragic outcome of this election.
Had we not rigged our nominating process and permitted other candidates to competitively vie for the Democratic nomination, we might be in a very different and more hopeful position today. There are any number of Democrats who would not have carried Hillary's baggage into the election, foremost among whom were Joe Biden and Liz Warren, but even had we nominated Bernie Sanders I believe he would have won by cutting Trump's blue-collar support right out from under him.
With Hillary, we shot ourselves not in the foot but in the heart. We need to remember our great liberal and libertarian (with a lower-case "L") traditions in the Democratic Party and regain our pride in our great accomplishments. The LAST thing we need to do is to become Republican Lite.
1
As you point out, the Democrats have been moving right since Reagan.
And their presidential candidate lost to a Republican who vowed to protect Social Security and Medicare and promised jobs to the working class. Boy, that dash right worked out well for Democrats this election.
Trump's statements may be all flim flam, but he actually made real economically liberal promises, something Democrats seem to have forgotten how to do, never mind actually deliver on. And we won't mention the polls showing Sanders wiping the floor with Trump- the Clintonistas are quite sensitive on that point (Rigged! Meaningless!)
So sure Russ, the Democrats could move further right.
But it would be nice if there were someone, anyone on the left. The left that doesn't obsess about bathrooms anyway.
And their presidential candidate lost to a Republican who vowed to protect Social Security and Medicare and promised jobs to the working class. Boy, that dash right worked out well for Democrats this election.
Trump's statements may be all flim flam, but he actually made real economically liberal promises, something Democrats seem to have forgotten how to do, never mind actually deliver on. And we won't mention the polls showing Sanders wiping the floor with Trump- the Clintonistas are quite sensitive on that point (Rigged! Meaningless!)
So sure Russ, the Democrats could move further right.
But it would be nice if there were someone, anyone on the left. The left that doesn't obsess about bathrooms anyway.
1
I can't tell if Douthat is concern trolling, or if he is actually sincere in drawing the opposite conclusion from reality.
To the question in the headline, "Can The Democrats Move Right?", my answer is no, they actually can't move right without becoming actual Republicans. One of the reasons that Hillary Clinton lost is that, aside from a few token stances on social issues, she is a corporatist, center-right politician. On the other hand, her opponent, Trump, won by running a populist campaign while avoiding most of the right's ideological orthodoxy.
To those of Douthat's political ideology, the solution to every problem is moving to the right. During the 2012 election, which the leftist won handily, the solution was for the losing party to move to the right. For the 2016 election, the centrist (but more leftist) candidate won the popular vote handily but narrowly lost the electoral college to a Republican who ran far to the left of his primary opponents. The solution -- for the losing party to move to the right.
The irony is that Trump has shown every intention of governing from the far right, eliminating the ACA and rolling both Medicare, Medicaid and perhaps even privatizing social security. These are likely to create a huge blowback effect that will send voters running to the left.
So, no, Mr. Douthat, not only can the Democrats not move to the right, but they should move to the left.
To the question in the headline, "Can The Democrats Move Right?", my answer is no, they actually can't move right without becoming actual Republicans. One of the reasons that Hillary Clinton lost is that, aside from a few token stances on social issues, she is a corporatist, center-right politician. On the other hand, her opponent, Trump, won by running a populist campaign while avoiding most of the right's ideological orthodoxy.
To those of Douthat's political ideology, the solution to every problem is moving to the right. During the 2012 election, which the leftist won handily, the solution was for the losing party to move to the right. For the 2016 election, the centrist (but more leftist) candidate won the popular vote handily but narrowly lost the electoral college to a Republican who ran far to the left of his primary opponents. The solution -- for the losing party to move to the right.
The irony is that Trump has shown every intention of governing from the far right, eliminating the ACA and rolling both Medicare, Medicaid and perhaps even privatizing social security. These are likely to create a huge blowback effect that will send voters running to the left.
So, no, Mr. Douthat, not only can the Democrats not move to the right, but they should move to the left.
2
Here's another truth. Even on its worst day, the Democratic Party hasn't produced a candidate, and now president-elect, as mindlessly racist and bigoted as the G.O.P. has, while being consumed by it lock, stock, and barrel.
And that whole "elite" argument is going nowhere, once you take a closer look at the Billionaire con-man who will soon hold the keys to the castle while continuing to run his business ventures that have priority over running the country.
Granted, the Dems could do much better at remembering everyone isn't in the 1% Club -- but so could the Republicans, the once Party-of-Lincoln that now has him spinning in his grave.
Of course, there are those who think Bernie Sanders did wonders for the Democratic Party ... and that may be true, except he's not a Democrat.
And in the end what he really managed to do was create a rift so wide, that it produced two seperate parties gnawing at itself from within.
If anything, both the Democrats and Republicans have to remember why they are in existence, and WHO they are there to represent: We, the People!!!
And until now, they've both largely failed at that.
And that whole "elite" argument is going nowhere, once you take a closer look at the Billionaire con-man who will soon hold the keys to the castle while continuing to run his business ventures that have priority over running the country.
Granted, the Dems could do much better at remembering everyone isn't in the 1% Club -- but so could the Republicans, the once Party-of-Lincoln that now has him spinning in his grave.
Of course, there are those who think Bernie Sanders did wonders for the Democratic Party ... and that may be true, except he's not a Democrat.
And in the end what he really managed to do was create a rift so wide, that it produced two seperate parties gnawing at itself from within.
If anything, both the Democrats and Republicans have to remember why they are in existence, and WHO they are there to represent: We, the People!!!
And until now, they've both largely failed at that.
1
The test will come today in Ryan vs. Pelosi. It will be a sign of suicidal tendencies if they re-elect Pelosi.
2
This article is so detached from reality that I cannot even begin to critique its flaws in the allotted space. Suffice it to say that the Democratic party has been moving to the right for decades and it has proven a disastrous tactic. The party is now losing major elections because it is hemorrhaging support on its left flank. Bill Clinton's (and now Obama's) ill-advised "centrism" has left us with a Democratic party that is willing to negotiate away social support programs, condones domestic spying on every from of communication, pursues optional wars for geopolitical advantage, bails out and fails to prosecute any financial crime, and tacitly allows carbon emissions to go on unchecked in the face of evidence of mounting disaster. How much more rightward could they go? Do they actually need to start burning subversive books and stoning social non-conformists in the capital mall to make you happy?
Meanwhile what passes for the right these days is getting awfully close to naked fascism. It's about time we all worked to end the reign of our two horribly broken dominant parties. I intend to work toward that goal with my vote and my donations.
Meanwhile what passes for the right these days is getting awfully close to naked fascism. It's about time we all worked to end the reign of our two horribly broken dominant parties. I intend to work toward that goal with my vote and my donations.
10
The Left always sees itself as a paragon of reason and pragmatism. The reality is that both Left and Right are very ideological and increasingly so. The Left is moving farther and farther to the Left. President Obama is an ideologue, but he fancies himself a pragmatist. Normalizing relations with dictatorships unilaterally and weakening America's foreign presence is ideological, not pragmatic. It comes along with the belief that America is not particularly special and should not be an example to the free world. The Left either hates America or has convinced half the country of that. Constant protests with kneeling to the national anthem and burning flags in reaction to Donald Trump does not really strengthen the case. The conservative position is that America is the greatest country in the world despite its faults, and we need to preserve that and lead by example. The Left sees America as racist white people oppressing minorities founded in sins that can never be forgiven. How is that not ideological? Is the Left totally unaware of its radical positions? Identity politics is destroying the fabric of society. The hard Left actively promotes segregation on college campuses.
Government health care, extreme limits on the second amendment, and restriction of the press are not things we can compromise on. Nor is unilateral concessions to our enemies. These are radical positions and must be opposed.
Government health care, extreme limits on the second amendment, and restriction of the press are not things we can compromise on. Nor is unilateral concessions to our enemies. These are radical positions and must be opposed.
1
William Jefferson Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama were both elected to two terms as President of the United States while nominally being liberal progressive Democrats. In reality both men are well to the socioeconomic political right of FDR and LBJ as expected but Ike and Nixon as well. Clinton twice won office by a plurality of the popular vote. While Obama twice won a popular vote majority.
From 1992 to 2016 the Republicans won the popular vote majority for President only once in 2004. In the Presidential election years of 2008, 2012 and 2016, 57%, 59% and 58% of white Americans voted Republican McCain/Palin, Romney/Ryan and Trump/Pence. Moving the Democratic Party any further to the right would be wrong.
From 1992 to 2016 the Republicans won the popular vote majority for President only once in 2004. In the Presidential election years of 2008, 2012 and 2016, 57%, 59% and 58% of white Americans voted Republican McCain/Palin, Romney/Ryan and Trump/Pence. Moving the Democratic Party any further to the right would be wrong.
6
This thinking is wrong on many levels. The Republicans have been able to attract support due primarily to the enthusiasm deficit the Democrats face. Republicans have consistently supported conservative principles that have excited not only their base, but also 'Reagan Democrats' and the electorate overall. That is why they currently control most statehouses and all 3 branches of the Federal government - in short, almost everything.
The notions put forward in this article are the same warmed-over Republican light prescriptions for the Democratic party that we have been hearing for decades. How has that been working out for the Democrats?
The Democrats need to do the opposite of the advice in this article - Bernie tapped into an excited and enthusiastic base that had the potential to pull the middle toward the left. The approach recommended in this article is EXACTLY what the Democrats did in this election. And it didn't work. It's time for Democrats to seize the banner of populism they so rightly deserve, and take back the enthusiasm factor. Pretending to be moderate Republicans won't achieve this.
The notions put forward in this article are the same warmed-over Republican light prescriptions for the Democratic party that we have been hearing for decades. How has that been working out for the Democrats?
The Democrats need to do the opposite of the advice in this article - Bernie tapped into an excited and enthusiastic base that had the potential to pull the middle toward the left. The approach recommended in this article is EXACTLY what the Democrats did in this election. And it didn't work. It's time for Democrats to seize the banner of populism they so rightly deserve, and take back the enthusiasm factor. Pretending to be moderate Republicans won't achieve this.
5
We are all moving "right" off the cliff. The next sensation will be freefall
4
We Democrats are way too far to the right already. The party leaders severed contact from the traditional base and when called on that flaw would point out, in a condescending tone, that the party has done a lot for the poor. People like my parents and grandparents were taken for granted on the premise that they had no where else to go. They went. The Democratic party has been hijacked by the limousine liberals before. The LL's only hear and see other LL's. They don't listen to the base. We need to quit paying any attention to people who live and think in a fantasy land.
2
Every time I read Douthat about the need for Dems to turn into right wingers and find "better" quality people to run for office, I am reminded that he has just forgotten that his party just ran and won with a mentally deranged liar and con artist extraordinaire who is busily choosing the most ignorant idealogues possible for his cabinet.
6
The Democrats do not need to move right at all...they won the votes. Actually further left and a stronger candidate would do the trick.
3
Perhaps Ross is right, Democrats should call a truce in the culture war. This would certainly be good politics for LGBT people as well as the Democratic Party, because 'religious freedom' laws would immediately take away a key claim of religious conservatives that same-sex marriage etc is a threat.
But we should hold out for a religious freedom law that also protects LGBT people from discrimination when religion is not clearly at issue. So a baker would not be expected to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, but they would be expected to bake a birthday cake for someone who happens to be LGBT.
However, it should be acknowledged that this is still deeply unfair to LGBT people. Why should their civil rights protections have an exception for religious people to discriminate against them, when other protected groups have no such gap in their civil rights? If religion is to be a burden on someone, why should it be a burden on people who don't believe or belong to the religion? And why should religion be off the hook in regards to LGBT people, when it is religion that motivates discrimination against LGBT people in the first place? LGBT people have suffered centuries of discrimination and worse at the hands of religion.
But we should hold out for a religious freedom law that also protects LGBT people from discrimination when religion is not clearly at issue. So a baker would not be expected to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, but they would be expected to bake a birthday cake for someone who happens to be LGBT.
However, it should be acknowledged that this is still deeply unfair to LGBT people. Why should their civil rights protections have an exception for religious people to discriminate against them, when other protected groups have no such gap in their civil rights? If religion is to be a burden on someone, why should it be a burden on people who don't believe or belong to the religion? And why should religion be off the hook in regards to LGBT people, when it is religion that motivates discrimination against LGBT people in the first place? LGBT people have suffered centuries of discrimination and worse at the hands of religion.
The party who panders to the Christians is the one that wins. Many Christians are split because the Democrats are wonderfully supportive of programs that help the poor (which is great) but also support the idea of abortion for inconvenience sake as completely normal (which Christians consider abhorrent). They are also scared of churches being sued by gay couples wanting to use their priests and facilities for weddings. In the end, the abortion issue usually determines their vote. Which is why Trump won.
In my opinion, the Democrats should re-adopt the position that abortion should remain legal but rare. Preferably, a choice of last resort. Maybe putting forward a program that helps women choose to keep their babies (free prenatal care and free child care to single mothers who make less than $25,000 per year) would convert millions of Christian Republicans to Christian Democrats. Stress that making abortion illegal does little to decrease the abortion rate, and only leads to thousands of maternal deaths resulting in thousands of orphans (70% of abortion seekers already have at least one child.) Increasing minimum wage will go far to decreasing abortion rates. Make this common knowledge. Keep gay marriage, but pass laws that churches cannot be sued by gay couples that feel discriminated against and make a big deal of it. "Democrats: the defenders of the churches". This will help other Christians convert back to Democrats.
In my opinion, the Democrats should re-adopt the position that abortion should remain legal but rare. Preferably, a choice of last resort. Maybe putting forward a program that helps women choose to keep their babies (free prenatal care and free child care to single mothers who make less than $25,000 per year) would convert millions of Christian Republicans to Christian Democrats. Stress that making abortion illegal does little to decrease the abortion rate, and only leads to thousands of maternal deaths resulting in thousands of orphans (70% of abortion seekers already have at least one child.) Increasing minimum wage will go far to decreasing abortion rates. Make this common knowledge. Keep gay marriage, but pass laws that churches cannot be sued by gay couples that feel discriminated against and make a big deal of it. "Democrats: the defenders of the churches". This will help other Christians convert back to Democrats.
2
With the sterling example of the Right over the last eight years fresh in our minds,and the logical outcome of that behavior about to step into the White House, why on earth would Democrats want to step to the right? Snap out of it, Ross - you're dreaming.
1
The country is becoming more and more unworthy of the Democratic Party. After all, you have to be a thinking person with developed emotional balance to understand and embrace its precepts. For instance, welfare benefits currently disbursed are at an all-time low and are riddled with work provisions, yet Mr. Douthat still decries it as incentivizing a "workless" culture. Facts don't matter, but appeal to reactive sentiment is a winning calculus for a country suffering from a severe case of intellectual malnutrition and stunted emotional growth.
3
Mr. Douthat, you salted your piece with phrases such as "... the party’s leftward drift ..." No, the Democratic party is in the dumper because it abandoned the left. There is no Democratic party, only one party of the radical right and another of the right. Fascist and Republican more accurately describes what we have now.
Huge crowds came out to hear Bernie Sanders. They wanted a leader who offered change. Hillary offered more of the same, a disappointing ride on the same train to nowhere. Trump filled the gap, offering change. The changes he advocates will devastate our economy, society, and foreign relationships, but change we will get.
The corporate news media including the NYT is complicit. You helped Hillary win and then lose. What changes will you make? Will the NYT move to the right? Become more like the WSJ? Wake up, Ross. We need constructive change, and media that focus on the policy issues instead of some version of People magazine. Trump "plays" the media every day.
Huge crowds came out to hear Bernie Sanders. They wanted a leader who offered change. Hillary offered more of the same, a disappointing ride on the same train to nowhere. Trump filled the gap, offering change. The changes he advocates will devastate our economy, society, and foreign relationships, but change we will get.
The corporate news media including the NYT is complicit. You helped Hillary win and then lose. What changes will you make? Will the NYT move to the right? Become more like the WSJ? Wake up, Ross. We need constructive change, and media that focus on the policy issues instead of some version of People magazine. Trump "plays" the media every day.
4
People keep saying that working class whites voted against their economic interests. But did they? Trade and illegal immigration are the core reasons holding down wages. The trade deficit offshores 5 million jobs and illegal immigration increases the supply of workers (supply & demand). Some say no, it's automation holding down wages, but only the computer/electronics manufacturing segment representing only 13% of manufacturers has shown above average productivity with Moore's law improvements. The other 87% of manufacturers are no more productive than the overall economy (Upjohn.org Susan Houseman).
2
The whole 'right versus left' thing is convenient for pundits to perpetuate - it gives them something to write about. Conflict is important for story development and a simple conflict is easier for readers to understand in a short column or blog post.
Reality is much more complex. People in the Midwest did not necessarily vote for Trump because of his policies. His only real policy position was only ever 'Trump for President', everything else was window dressing. No, people in the Midwest voted for him because he asked them to. Democrats tend to focus on the needs of their constituency, as do Republicans. All Trump had to do was acknowledge the existence of people who do not fit comfortably either of those constituencies.
The Democratic Party has focused on people on the coast for a variety of reasons, many of them historical. This focus tended to be to the exclusion of paying attention to problems of working class white people. For example, modest policies that foster racial diversity are good and we still need them. But a parent in a small mostly white area in West Virginia is likely to ask 'why doesn't anyone help my really smart kid go to an elite college?'. It is a fair, if naïve question.
Latin Americans, African Americans and working class whites share a lot of the same problems. Democrats would be wise to acknowledge that the real battle now is between the haves and have nots.
Reality is much more complex. People in the Midwest did not necessarily vote for Trump because of his policies. His only real policy position was only ever 'Trump for President', everything else was window dressing. No, people in the Midwest voted for him because he asked them to. Democrats tend to focus on the needs of their constituency, as do Republicans. All Trump had to do was acknowledge the existence of people who do not fit comfortably either of those constituencies.
The Democratic Party has focused on people on the coast for a variety of reasons, many of them historical. This focus tended to be to the exclusion of paying attention to problems of working class white people. For example, modest policies that foster racial diversity are good and we still need them. But a parent in a small mostly white area in West Virginia is likely to ask 'why doesn't anyone help my really smart kid go to an elite college?'. It is a fair, if naïve question.
Latin Americans, African Americans and working class whites share a lot of the same problems. Democrats would be wise to acknowledge that the real battle now is between the haves and have nots.
1
Well, Ross - the problem is that it wasn’t “Today’s Democrats” who have been “Convinced that the party’s leftward drift under President Obama and candidate Hillary Clinton was in line with the drift of the country as a whole”
- that was actually Yesterdays’s Democrats: Center-right; Wall street-friendly; neoliberal; interventionist; GDP-obsessed.
It’s unknown if Today’s Democrats were outnumbered by Yesterday’s Democrats, but they were certainly outmaneuvered by a combination of DNC myopia and Trump’s horrifically cynical co-opting of the overlapping area between the New Democrats and millions of people disenfranchised by the neoliberal (and neocon) project.
Move to the right? I don't think so.
- that was actually Yesterdays’s Democrats: Center-right; Wall street-friendly; neoliberal; interventionist; GDP-obsessed.
It’s unknown if Today’s Democrats were outnumbered by Yesterday’s Democrats, but they were certainly outmaneuvered by a combination of DNC myopia and Trump’s horrifically cynical co-opting of the overlapping area between the New Democrats and millions of people disenfranchised by the neoliberal (and neocon) project.
Move to the right? I don't think so.
1
If the Democratic Party moves to the right - not supporting a healthy safety net, equal rights and protection for all, gender equality, workers' rights to balance corporate greed, women's reproductive rights - they would then be called the Republican Party. And flush with success right now, just wait to see how this next round of harming the 98% for the benefit of the 1% goes down. Wait for it.
1
The election of Trump does not prove that the country is moving right. All it proves is that just less than half the voters were taken in by an unscrupulous opportunist. Trump is an aberration in presidential politics, and his election cannot be looked at as proving anything at all, except that in 2016 millions of Americans lost their minds.
2
Ross Douthat knows nothing about true liberalism. The answer is not to move to the right but to return to FDR. That means being even stronger in advocating for a living wage and universal healthcare.
2
The Democratic Party may carry the name of liberalism, but if it does it is simply an example of how these names have no meaning in current politics.
The Democrats under Obama, ostensibly their most "liberal" standard bearer, have waged war for eight years, invaded or occupied six countries, killed hundreds of thousands, displaced millions, ratcheted up the cold war, threatened China, rolled back the Bolivarian revolution and established military bases across the continent of Africa.
On the domestic front he has given us a profit driven health care system, designed by the Heritage Foundation, deported more immigrants than any president in history and bailed out the banks. He sued them for fraud on behalf of stock holders, the 1%, but brought no cases on behalf of homeowners. He increase oil and gas drilling on federal lands, he only reluctantly embraced gay marriage, he declined to advocate for an urban jobs program and he has increased the mass surveillance state beyond what anyone but Edward Snowden could imagine. Add to this record of liberalism the fact that he has led one of the most closed and secretive presidencies and gone after whistleblowers with a vengeance.
The idea that this represents "liberalism' is precisely way the term as used repeatedly by main stream media has no meaning. it's simply to convey the illusion of real differences between the Dem's and the GOP. They both serve their corporate masters, only in different ways.
The Democrats under Obama, ostensibly their most "liberal" standard bearer, have waged war for eight years, invaded or occupied six countries, killed hundreds of thousands, displaced millions, ratcheted up the cold war, threatened China, rolled back the Bolivarian revolution and established military bases across the continent of Africa.
On the domestic front he has given us a profit driven health care system, designed by the Heritage Foundation, deported more immigrants than any president in history and bailed out the banks. He sued them for fraud on behalf of stock holders, the 1%, but brought no cases on behalf of homeowners. He increase oil and gas drilling on federal lands, he only reluctantly embraced gay marriage, he declined to advocate for an urban jobs program and he has increased the mass surveillance state beyond what anyone but Edward Snowden could imagine. Add to this record of liberalism the fact that he has led one of the most closed and secretive presidencies and gone after whistleblowers with a vengeance.
The idea that this represents "liberalism' is precisely way the term as used repeatedly by main stream media has no meaning. it's simply to convey the illusion of real differences between the Dem's and the GOP. They both serve their corporate masters, only in different ways.
2
Many years ago, when I was a high school student, most of the public high schools had a technical training program -- for students during the day, and for adults during the evening. Such programs were designed to enable high school students as well as adults to acquire the necessary skills to get a well-paying job as a carpenter, brick layer, auto mechanic etc. Labor unions were intimately involved in such programs by certifying the skill levels attained, e.g., apprentice, journeyman, first-class, master etc. Sadly, these programs no longer exist at a time when such skills are needed to enable those who do not plan to go to college to seek better paying jobs. Here is a program that the Democratic Party , in conjunction with labor unions, can support at the local level.
1
Russ is wise to make some attempt to focus his argument at the supranational level, for the Clinton lose at the national national (inWI, MI and PA) was due to conservativec Republican anti-Keynesian obstruction of a more vigorous recovery, nativist Republican obstruction of a road to immigrant citizenship and the roughshod trade deals and simple minded federalism of the last quarter if the twentieth century that arise from that eras disproportionately Republican pressed liberalism. It also so had a lot to do with a vigorous Fox and hate radio led, early Benghazi signalled) recontinuation of the three decade vilification of Hillary Clinton.
Still the attempt is half hearted, for most of Russ's recommendations are fir a more BILL Clinton like adjustment of identity rhetoric and safety net advertising that might loo r might not make more gains with one electoral hand than they lose with the other.
A fruitful subnational recommendation not madec that helps explain GOP gubernatorial successes might be for more fiscally conservatism at the subational level (think MA's Weld and Baker) at which race-for-the-bottom pressures do operate.
Still the attempt is half hearted, for most of Russ's recommendations are fir a more BILL Clinton like adjustment of identity rhetoric and safety net advertising that might loo r might not make more gains with one electoral hand than they lose with the other.
A fruitful subnational recommendation not madec that helps explain GOP gubernatorial successes might be for more fiscally conservatism at the subational level (think MA's Weld and Baker) at which race-for-the-bottom pressures do operate.
Dem ideology looks like the geography of blue states in the election -- it is extreme left socially and banker-right economically. If it all shifts right in step, the economic part will be under water!
The suggestion that we abandon some of the most marginalized people in this country, so that we might win more elections, is offensive. I don’t see the point in addressing the arguments you use to support this position. Even if they were correct, I would still disagree. It seems that there may be no middle ground where we can meet, since we don’t share even the most basic of moral principles.
9
You forgot the part where we won 2 million votes more than Trump. Giving up the social safety net is about three bridges too far.
4
The Democrats have already moved to the right over the years, more or less becoming a centrist party, and hence their current predicament. The Democrats' problem has been their gradual move to the right in response to the GOP sliding further right. The Dems need to reclaim their soul and move back to the left where it belongs and renouncing corporate interests and becoming more grassroots.
2
Through practice the Republican playbook for getting elected has been honed to a fine edge.
Run against taxes!
Run against government waste in Washington!
Run against "The Others": The poor, the sick, the disabled, the unemployed, African-Americans, Muslims, non-Whites, non-Christians, unions, teachers, scientists, and all foreigners with whom we share the planet.
Undermine the Democrats by "Swiftboating" their candidates:
Dukakis- Willie Horton
Kerry- Vietnam valor
Cleland- triple amputee from Vietnam wounds
Gore- Internet
Obama- Birther, Secret Muslim, "Liar"
Clinton- Whitewater, Vince Foster, Benghazi, Email, FBI, Clinton Foundation
Fox News Propaganda, AM Hate Radio, Fake news on social media
Lies, lies, and more lies...
"They're gonna take away your guns", "they're killing babies and selling fetal parts", "your religion is under attack", "the economy is terrible", "everything is getting worse", "we can't afford Medicare, Social Security, etc", "We will bring back factory jobs", "we will bring back coal mining jobs", "Climate Change is a hoax", "Voter Fraud is rampant", "regulations are destroying jobs"
The Democratic Party has not engaged in any comparable behavior.
As those who voted for a "change" gets to learn what Trump, his Cabinet, the Koch brothers, ALEC, the "alt-right white supremacists" and the Supreme Court have in store for them, the Democrats' message will resonate.
The answer is not to move to the right!
Run against taxes!
Run against government waste in Washington!
Run against "The Others": The poor, the sick, the disabled, the unemployed, African-Americans, Muslims, non-Whites, non-Christians, unions, teachers, scientists, and all foreigners with whom we share the planet.
Undermine the Democrats by "Swiftboating" their candidates:
Dukakis- Willie Horton
Kerry- Vietnam valor
Cleland- triple amputee from Vietnam wounds
Gore- Internet
Obama- Birther, Secret Muslim, "Liar"
Clinton- Whitewater, Vince Foster, Benghazi, Email, FBI, Clinton Foundation
Fox News Propaganda, AM Hate Radio, Fake news on social media
Lies, lies, and more lies...
"They're gonna take away your guns", "they're killing babies and selling fetal parts", "your religion is under attack", "the economy is terrible", "everything is getting worse", "we can't afford Medicare, Social Security, etc", "We will bring back factory jobs", "we will bring back coal mining jobs", "Climate Change is a hoax", "Voter Fraud is rampant", "regulations are destroying jobs"
The Democratic Party has not engaged in any comparable behavior.
As those who voted for a "change" gets to learn what Trump, his Cabinet, the Koch brothers, ALEC, the "alt-right white supremacists" and the Supreme Court have in store for them, the Democrats' message will resonate.
The answer is not to move to the right!
7
Of course, many commenters are making similar points, but I'd figure I'd give it a go as well.
It's the economy, stupid. And specifically, the concentration of wealth in oligarchic hands leading to a shrinking of the industrial middle class.
If wealth were more spread out and the middle class had enough buying power to fuel demand expansion; if taxation rates were such that the "captains of industry" were plowing money back into business concerns--including wages and employee investment, rather than offshoring it; if unions actually had enough power to somewhat counteract oligarchic tendencies . . .we wouldn't be talking much about the guns, God, and gay cultural differences. Sure, there will always be some culturally conservative voters who will vote almost entirely on those issues, but for most of the Midwest, and even the South, these are ancillary concerns, not the main event.
The Democrats need to move what is traditionally thought of as "left" on economic issues. They need to stop being seen as the party of oligarchs themselves--to the "rock ribbed" voter, the Democrats are just a more socially liberal version of oligarch supporter (and when that's the only difference, it explains a lot about how legislative races skew Republican). They need a new New Deal--and, of course, they have to get better at explaining how this Deal would help the economically disposessed. If they do that, cultural and "welfare cheat" issues will recede into background.
It's the economy, stupid. And specifically, the concentration of wealth in oligarchic hands leading to a shrinking of the industrial middle class.
If wealth were more spread out and the middle class had enough buying power to fuel demand expansion; if taxation rates were such that the "captains of industry" were plowing money back into business concerns--including wages and employee investment, rather than offshoring it; if unions actually had enough power to somewhat counteract oligarchic tendencies . . .we wouldn't be talking much about the guns, God, and gay cultural differences. Sure, there will always be some culturally conservative voters who will vote almost entirely on those issues, but for most of the Midwest, and even the South, these are ancillary concerns, not the main event.
The Democrats need to move what is traditionally thought of as "left" on economic issues. They need to stop being seen as the party of oligarchs themselves--to the "rock ribbed" voter, the Democrats are just a more socially liberal version of oligarch supporter (and when that's the only difference, it explains a lot about how legislative races skew Republican). They need a new New Deal--and, of course, they have to get better at explaining how this Deal would help the economically disposessed. If they do that, cultural and "welfare cheat" issues will recede into background.
6
Dear Ross,
Moving right would not win elections for the Democratic Party.
The factors that appear to motivate the right-wing voter don't work so well on the more liberal among us. Fake news falls on pretty much deaf ears, bald-face lies are roundly condemned and grabbing women's nether bits is considered sexual assault.
As for policy, as long as the GOP is the PPP ( Party of Pollution and Poison) no one who truly cares about the future of our children should ever pull the lever for the despoilers of the planet Earth.
Moving right would not win elections for the Democratic Party.
The factors that appear to motivate the right-wing voter don't work so well on the more liberal among us. Fake news falls on pretty much deaf ears, bald-face lies are roundly condemned and grabbing women's nether bits is considered sexual assault.
As for policy, as long as the GOP is the PPP ( Party of Pollution and Poison) no one who truly cares about the future of our children should ever pull the lever for the despoilers of the planet Earth.
2
Here's my problem with Democrats, Hillary in particular: they are often just trying to win, rather than trying to just focus on what's right. There is no need to move rightward. In this environment the actual battle is between right and wrong, between discrimination and openness, between protecting the environment and polluting it, between providing health care for Americans and letting people be extorted by health care companies. Republicans have seized all the ground on the wrong side of these issues. Dems need to stop compromising with "wrong" and start leading towards what is "right". Oh, and actually FIGHTING for progressive positions might help as well.
4
As usual here we have an instance of a conservative person living in a bubble. Do you read what you write? Reagan didn't triumph. Your bubble has shielded you on how history looks at his presidency from a non partisan view. Your bubble has you believing that the Clinton presidency wasn't affected by conservatives who held him hostage to economic policies that were a disaster for labor. Your bubble doesn't see how gerrymandering "rigging" helped elect Trump and GOP (alt right) candidates. Your bubble doesn't want to accept that the Obama administration was an advocate of free trade, enforcing immigration policies and a strong defense that had more drone strikes instead of American boots on the ground. Your bubble has you believing that that true patriots of this country are a losing coalition but your bubble refuses to recognize that the GOP (alt-right) have worked long and hard to guarantee voter rights are extinguished. Your bubble has democrats calling for a truce on culture wars when it is the GOP that are throwing the grenades. Only in a conservative bubble are their wars being waged against catholic charities and hospitals, and religious schools. The bubble has you believing that everyone on welfare is cheating the system. And that the recipients are taking their $800 a month windfall on a cruise around the world. The bubble has you believing that crime is up when the contrary is true. Please exit the bubble so that we can have a meaningful discussion.
3
move right? why? what they need to do is not keep shooting themselves in the foot with comments like basket of deplorable and talk of putting coal miners out of jobs. after they can manage that? they need to really meet and understand all the working people and small business people that have been left out of the soaring wall street $$$ and the tech boom. what is coming from trump is going to make the rich richer at the expense of these very people and a much wider swath of the american public. our government will be looted right in from of our eyes.
After reading Douthat I am reminded of Richard Mourdoch's comment when he ran for the US Senate from Indiana in 2012. As I recall he stated that believed in bipartisanship as long as the Democrats agreed with the GOP's agenda. What Douthat is recommending is abject surrender by the Democrats. No Way!
6
Ross doesn't realize that the Democratic Party is already as far right as they can go and still be a left-wing party.
This article has no sense of orientation to the full spectrum of ideas and is quite frankly insulting.
This article has no sense of orientation to the full spectrum of ideas and is quite frankly insulting.
5
Two words: Bill Clinton. He was the most successful Democratic President in the recent past, because he appealed to the common man. Obama was an anomaly, energizing minority voters in the general election, but incapable of creating the consensus needed to produce bipartisan results. Until the Democrats ween themselves off the big money of ultra-progressives like George Soros and Tom Steyer, they'll continue to be pulled to the far left and unable to connect to center-right and center-left voters.
2
"For instance: Democrats could attempt to declare a culture-war truce, consolidating the gains of the Obama era while disavowing attempts to regulate institutions and communities that don’t follow the current social-liberal line."
And then Douthat literally starts listing ways in which one group of Americans should be allowed to discriminate against another group of Americans. This is why I'm so dismayed at the people who voted for Trump. I see the focus of Trump and Republicans on only taking away rights from people they can't abide. This whole article just reinforces that.
Yes, it would be awesome if everyone had a job that paid exceptionally well. But markets don't work that way so there needs to be a way to keep people alive and functioning while also moving them toward the markets that pay. This process requires the people (through gov't) and individual initiative to work.
Yes, it would be easier if people were just binary male/female and completely heterosexual, but no one is created that way. We all need to understand that we all fit on a spectrum of gender and sexuality and encourage everyone to find the place that's right for them.
And, most of the people voting in the last election are immigrants, regardless of how long we and our families have lived in America. To reject new immigrants diminishes our own history.
My America is one that's always getting better and more hopeful for everybody. I don't want that ideal to end.
And then Douthat literally starts listing ways in which one group of Americans should be allowed to discriminate against another group of Americans. This is why I'm so dismayed at the people who voted for Trump. I see the focus of Trump and Republicans on only taking away rights from people they can't abide. This whole article just reinforces that.
Yes, it would be awesome if everyone had a job that paid exceptionally well. But markets don't work that way so there needs to be a way to keep people alive and functioning while also moving them toward the markets that pay. This process requires the people (through gov't) and individual initiative to work.
Yes, it would be easier if people were just binary male/female and completely heterosexual, but no one is created that way. We all need to understand that we all fit on a spectrum of gender and sexuality and encourage everyone to find the place that's right for them.
And, most of the people voting in the last election are immigrants, regardless of how long we and our families have lived in America. To reject new immigrants diminishes our own history.
My America is one that's always getting better and more hopeful for everybody. I don't want that ideal to end.
8
1) The problem is the right-wing media and Republican voters live in an alternative reality. I have neighbors who still think the Clintons had Vince Foster killed.
2) The Republican Party is going to run up the deficit / debt (again). They will cut taxes for the rich and social programs for the rest and put the bill on the country's credit card to be paid for by our children and grandchildren.
2) The Republican Party is going to run up the deficit / debt (again). They will cut taxes for the rich and social programs for the rest and put the bill on the country's credit card to be paid for by our children and grandchildren.
1
Ross,
This is not my fight but I think you are as wrong as wrong can be. The pace of change in human society is unprecedented. There is no real discussion of policies here.
The Democratic Party presents no real solutions to automation, the end of the personal automobile and the complete absurdity of the 40+ hour work week in the post consumer society.
I have seen this story before it is the story of the Children of Israel leaving Egypt and having to choose between the almost foreign leader with the speech defect Moses and the articulate Korach who tells them they can go back to Egypt if only they are willing to become Egyptians.
America left Europe and its greatest colonial Empire in 1776. Today the Republicans are the party of Empire and colonialism and they promise greatness if only Americans would cease their fruitless journey to the promised land and embrace being Egyptians.
The Democrats can paint no such picture. The Democrats can only promise wandering in the desert for a generation or more and an uncertain future at the end of the journey. The manna will fall from the sky everyday but nomads cannot carry around too much stuff.
The founders of America many not have believed in a man in the sky watching over us but they believed in the bible. Fundamentalism is post Darwin. For the founders the USA was to be a wandering in the desert to the promised land.
Ross, you keep telling us you hate Egypt why do you want to go back?
This is not my fight but I think you are as wrong as wrong can be. The pace of change in human society is unprecedented. There is no real discussion of policies here.
The Democratic Party presents no real solutions to automation, the end of the personal automobile and the complete absurdity of the 40+ hour work week in the post consumer society.
I have seen this story before it is the story of the Children of Israel leaving Egypt and having to choose between the almost foreign leader with the speech defect Moses and the articulate Korach who tells them they can go back to Egypt if only they are willing to become Egyptians.
America left Europe and its greatest colonial Empire in 1776. Today the Republicans are the party of Empire and colonialism and they promise greatness if only Americans would cease their fruitless journey to the promised land and embrace being Egyptians.
The Democrats can paint no such picture. The Democrats can only promise wandering in the desert for a generation or more and an uncertain future at the end of the journey. The manna will fall from the sky everyday but nomads cannot carry around too much stuff.
The founders of America many not have believed in a man in the sky watching over us but they believed in the bible. Fundamentalism is post Darwin. For the founders the USA was to be a wandering in the desert to the promised land.
Ross, you keep telling us you hate Egypt why do you want to go back?
1
You're trolling us, aren't you Ross? You gotta be, because you're too smart to actually believe the silly nonsense you've put out in this column.
Hillary Clinton lost the Electoral College for one reason and one reason only: core groups of reliable Democratic voters, particularly black people and the young, didn't turn out in the numbers Clinton needed and expected. Any analysis of the reasons for her loss needs above all else to explain why it should have been that Obama was able to turn these groups out in '08 and '12, when in '16 Clinton failed to do so. I have a few ideas as to why it might have been. As with most phenomena as complex as a presidential election, it is likely that multiple competing forces were at play. But if anything is for sure, it is that Clinton's failure to tack further to the right played NO ROLE WHATSOEVER in her failure to appeal to key Democratic constituencies.
Hillary Clinton lost the Electoral College for one reason and one reason only: core groups of reliable Democratic voters, particularly black people and the young, didn't turn out in the numbers Clinton needed and expected. Any analysis of the reasons for her loss needs above all else to explain why it should have been that Obama was able to turn these groups out in '08 and '12, when in '16 Clinton failed to do so. I have a few ideas as to why it might have been. As with most phenomena as complex as a presidential election, it is likely that multiple competing forces were at play. But if anything is for sure, it is that Clinton's failure to tack further to the right played NO ROLE WHATSOEVER in her failure to appeal to key Democratic constituencies.
3
The Democratic Party won the popular vote, yes, but look at the electoral map.
Look at all those states with Republican governors and legislators. What does this say about the half of American which votes Republican. The question I have can the Democratic Party create the political basis for a more liberal society. Can this Party promote it's views about the need for single payer health care system, closing tax loop holes which allow millionaires to pay little or no taxes, or trade/industrial policies which reward corporations for keeping jobs here or developing new job creation. It is not a matter of moving to the center or as stated to the right. It is a matter of the ability to educate the electorate to the reasons your world view better describes the issues you confront.
Look at all those states with Republican governors and legislators. What does this say about the half of American which votes Republican. The question I have can the Democratic Party create the political basis for a more liberal society. Can this Party promote it's views about the need for single payer health care system, closing tax loop holes which allow millionaires to pay little or no taxes, or trade/industrial policies which reward corporations for keeping jobs here or developing new job creation. It is not a matter of moving to the center or as stated to the right. It is a matter of the ability to educate the electorate to the reasons your world view better describes the issues you confront.
2
It is bad enough that we have an extreme right-wing party now controlling all branches of government with indications that individual rights guaranteed by the Constitution, that the Republican Party seems to disdain, will disappear in order to allow corporations to control everything, and to have two parties that have that same "philosophy" is essentially the end of democracy. While there could be arguments about political correctness that is not liked by the right because it suggests that all people are equal, not just the white minority, for the Democratic Party to give up fighting for the rights of all people would certainly end democracy in this republic. There has to be an alternative to totalitarianism that seems to be the goal of Republicans now, but no one will say it - yet. Republicans own it now, so that even the most ardent single-issue conservative voter will have no one else to blame but the Republican Party even if the Democrats remain the party of the little guy. Nice try Douthat.
2
Why not a Centrist Party? Extreme elements, right or left, are rarely in the interests of the majority.
2
Every time the Democrats move to the right, the Republicans respond by moving even further right. The people who want right wing laws and ideas will always have the Republican party to choose. Democrats need to move back to the left, such as protecting the workers of America as it once did.
2
One of the reasons Hillary lost is because of the hard right Bill took while in office: three strikes, "Super Predators", ending regulation on the banks and ending welfare as we know it.
Republicans won because of gerrymandering, tossing people off the voter registration lists, closing polling places in poor neighborhoods, ending early voting, gross lies and ginning up hatred, fear, racism, misogyny and Xenophobia in their followers.
When Obama led the country for 8 years did the Republicans move to the left? I can't close my eyes without seeing Mitch McConnell and his elk holding our country back.
Republicans won because of gerrymandering, tossing people off the voter registration lists, closing polling places in poor neighborhoods, ending early voting, gross lies and ginning up hatred, fear, racism, misogyny and Xenophobia in their followers.
When Obama led the country for 8 years did the Republicans move to the left? I can't close my eyes without seeing Mitch McConnell and his elk holding our country back.
2
While I agree that the Democrats must adjust some of their policy positions, I believe Trump will offer the party countless policy and managerial missteps to develop a winning agenda for the next election cycle. What concerns me more, which President Obama bears some of the blame for, is the lack of interest or focus on state offices. The party has all but ceded control of state legislatures and governorships to the Republican party ---aided by huge amounts of dark money in state and local elections. In the words of Tip O'Neill all politics is local.
1
The GOP are masters of selling exclusion and not inclusion, blaming economic woes on the poor, selling more war, selling trickle down in order to let the rich pay less taxes, quoting the bible inaccurately and lying to the American people in order to win elections.
Democrats hold the higher ground on any issue. We should stand up for what we know us right. We should not back down or water down our principals. What we need to do is learn how to fight like pit bulls for our beliefs, just like the GOP does. They win on ferocity and holding the soap box. They seem to impress the American people with their bravado. In the end, solid principals and sound economic policy will win the day. Trump is a blow hard and these next four years will lay the groundwork for progressive ideas. Once the ACA is dismantled and folks are dying without health coverage, the American people will demand change. Add in a war, started by Trump and his cabinet, and let's welcome a Democratic President in 2020.
Democrats hold the higher ground on any issue. We should stand up for what we know us right. We should not back down or water down our principals. What we need to do is learn how to fight like pit bulls for our beliefs, just like the GOP does. They win on ferocity and holding the soap box. They seem to impress the American people with their bravado. In the end, solid principals and sound economic policy will win the day. Trump is a blow hard and these next four years will lay the groundwork for progressive ideas. Once the ACA is dismantled and folks are dying without health coverage, the American people will demand change. Add in a war, started by Trump and his cabinet, and let's welcome a Democratic President in 2020.
2
If the U.S. was so "right" they would have nominated Cruz who they did not. HRC started moving more left with promoting free college, etc. The working people in the U.S. are having a difficult enough time providing for themselves. They would like discretionary income before the left confiscates it for overly generous, unrealistic programs of all kinds. Right now 94 million people in this country are not working. That translates into no support of Medicare, Social Security and in some cases federal income taxes. People who are paying income taxes will have the voice not the freeloaders.
1
Mr. Douthat, can you please cite your evidence about the "post-Ferguson spike in lawlessness"? As one of your regular readers, I am curious as to how you draw that conclusion. Much of what I have read in the New York Times has discussed the steady decline in violent crime in America over the last thirty years. Has there been a noted increase in crime after Ferguson? If there has been, the American people should be aware of the shape of the trend. Thank you for your time.
Don the Con ran a policy free white nationalist race. He got record numbers of "White working class" voters ((but handily lost the popular vote). The Donald won because of his identity politics, not despite it. He is now quickly jettisoning his few non far right policies and likely to support ending Medicare. Yet to you it's the Democrats that have to abandon identity politics and go to the right? You have it exactly wrong.
1
The supposition that HRC lost because she was too far to the left is false. Likewise, assuming that Trump's victory says anything about the right is a reach at best. This election was about fear, anger, and rage. It was America's Brexit.
1
I think the overall premise of this column is mistaken. It may be possible to find elements of Trump's platform that reject GOP orthodoxies, but I challenge the Douthat to produce any evidence that the typical voter carefully parsed Trump's policies versus those of prior candidates. His anger and faux anti-elitism resonated, no his inhoherent list of policiesi. Also, there is no evidence that the Republicans in Congress have done anything but continue their 40 year march to the right.
In terms Democrats adopting policies that reward work that's exactly what Obamacare does. If you are self-employed or work for an employer who is not required to provide insurance you can buy it through the exchange. That plus Medicare are on the chopping block.
I do agree that politics is about tone and emphasis. If Democrats are viewed in Iowa or Ohio as a party of coastal elites more concerned about cultural than economic issues they will struggle. I suspect though the solution lies more in finding the next Tom Harkin or Sherrod Brown, and then in emphasizing economic policies and the protection of the safety net.
In terms Democrats adopting policies that reward work that's exactly what Obamacare does. If you are self-employed or work for an employer who is not required to provide insurance you can buy it through the exchange. That plus Medicare are on the chopping block.
I do agree that politics is about tone and emphasis. If Democrats are viewed in Iowa or Ohio as a party of coastal elites more concerned about cultural than economic issues they will struggle. I suspect though the solution lies more in finding the next Tom Harkin or Sherrod Brown, and then in emphasizing economic policies and the protection of the safety net.
2
What Dems think or do is irrelevant because they do not vote. Trump received less than 25% of the votes of those eligible to vote. That is the same way the GOP got control of the congress in 2012 GOP 19.3% of the vote and Dems 16% of the vote. Elections matter. No voters equal no power. Pretty simple. As for Ross, he is always messing the mark on his so-called analysis with its misinformation and suppositions. Besides, no one has ever provided a definition of political labels like left and right to include the thousands of issues that form the basis of people's decisions on each issue. To be sure, left and right do not define anything except in each individual's mind.
1
Does anyone know what 'inducements' were 'offered' to Carrier regarding their decision not to off-shore those thousand jobs? I'd like to see the sausage-making on that. Any chance Mr. Trump can 'induce' big healthcare to actually provide affordable healthcare, as opposed to the current set-up where consumers are induced not to use it due to astronomical out-of-pocket expenses?
1
Ross, the Democrats have been moving to the right for 35+ years! Do you really not see that?
1
This column to me comes across as some kind of alternative history rather than an honest appraisal of what the Democratic Party has been doing since 1982. If Mr Douthat believes that the Democratic Party has moved left under Barack Obama, I respectfully submit that he is misinformed.
Had Mr. Obama moved the party to the left, he would have used the presidential bully pulpit to support and implement policies that advanced the interests of the Democrats' traditional constituencies, the working and middle classes. He would have pushed Medicare for All instead of a health care plan based on a Republican model. He would not have been in thrall to Wall Street, but would have supported Main Street.
There have been so many good books written about the Democrats move to the right starting with Bill Clinton's administration that to push the idea that Obama moved to the left is simply wrong. Had they been a left-leaning party, they would have put forward Bernie Sanders, and we'd be in a much different mood today.
Had Mr. Obama moved the party to the left, he would have used the presidential bully pulpit to support and implement policies that advanced the interests of the Democrats' traditional constituencies, the working and middle classes. He would have pushed Medicare for All instead of a health care plan based on a Republican model. He would not have been in thrall to Wall Street, but would have supported Main Street.
There have been so many good books written about the Democrats move to the right starting with Bill Clinton's administration that to push the idea that Obama moved to the left is simply wrong. Had they been a left-leaning party, they would have put forward Bernie Sanders, and we'd be in a much different mood today.
2
The "solution" for us Democrats is not to move more to the right but to further embrace the centrist/liberal ideas that have made this country flourish under Democratic leadership for decades. Mr. Douthat may not have noticed, but substantially more Americans voted for Ms. Clinton than for Mr. Trump, What desperately DOES need to change is the antiquated winner-take-all system of Electoral votes that persists everywhere in the U.S. except in the enlightened states of Maine and Nebraska. If proportional apportionment of Electoral votes, actually representative of the people's will, were in effect in all states, this discussion would be moot, as Ms. Clinton would be assembling her cabinet at this point instead of the spoiled child currently ranting on Twitter about stripping citizenship or jailing of flag burners or whatever issue has inflamed his mind at the moment. I do not expect the voters in the Electoral College to do what they should, which would be to ignore precedent and vote instead for the candidate who received the most votes. I do not support popular vote Presidential elections, as candidates would be attentive to only large population centers, thus creating another group of disenfranchised angry ignored voters in the less populous areas.
Sander would have won. While it is not to be, the loss of Clinton, the more right wing side of the Democratic party, is a warning that the Democrats have move too far right and have lost the traditional working class constituents. The right path is for the Democratic path to move to Sander's position where the progressive urbanites must give up some of their economic advantages to transform the economic fortune in the rust belt and beyond while the more social conservative people from the heartland must agree to disagree with the coastal urbanites and recognize people of different backgrounds and values can live in peace. Mr. Douthat, the country doesn't not need a right wing party with an alt-right wing party.
1
Now Ross is an expert on what the Democratic party needs? Please. Wrong, wrong and wrong. Democrats allowed Trump to co-op its economic message, pure and simple. Never again.
1
How about we stop blaming the party that won the vote and talk about ways to reform the electoral college, so that the will of the people--who rejected the Republican candidate by about 2 million votes--is not thwarted for the second time in 16 years. Americans have not rejected the Democrats' inclusive, progressive vision. A small number of favored (and not coincidentally, white) voters cost the actual winner the election, and now all we're talking about is how to appeal to these voters. We should instead look at ways to make sure the electoral college is subservient to the vote, not court a group whose voting powers exceed their numbers, and their sense. Ugh.
2
Ross:
Something for consideration for another column.
Our country will soon be governed by a Congress and a POTUS that were all elected by the minority of the people. Composition of the House and Senate favor the rural states, as does the Electoral system. Do you think it is a good idea for a minority view to make policy for the majority? It is what we are going to get.
Something for consideration for another column.
Our country will soon be governed by a Congress and a POTUS that were all elected by the minority of the people. Composition of the House and Senate favor the rural states, as does the Electoral system. Do you think it is a good idea for a minority view to make policy for the majority? It is what we are going to get.
1
I have read all the comments and am comforted that the majority still don't get it. As a conservative I am confident that we will continue to trounce the progressives at all levels of government. Yes, Hillary won the popular vote by 2 million. However, the Republicans garnered 3 million more votes nationwide in all the races. I feel great! Keep on, keeping on.
Very good advice. As a conservative I hope Democrats don't take it. But as an American I suppose I must hope they do.
1
The Democrats have a core belief: that we look out for each other, and especially for children and those who are disabled or cannot afford health care and the chance to become educated.
Identity politics simply means encouraging minorities, the poor, the indigenous to construct their own identities and to assert their collective will.
By 2024, white working-class Christians will become a minority themselves in the United States.
As the great Delores Iburarri said, "It is better to die fighting on your feet than live on your knees."
Identity politics simply means encouraging minorities, the poor, the indigenous to construct their own identities and to assert their collective will.
By 2024, white working-class Christians will become a minority themselves in the United States.
As the great Delores Iburarri said, "It is better to die fighting on your feet than live on your knees."
What Went Wrong is an alternate-reality liar promised every constituency in the country everything it wanted and the least educated 60 million in the country believed him. This message swept away a "deep GOP field," the most qualified DNC candidate in history, and the credibility of the establishment media. So "NO," the left should not embrace some wacky version of diluted Truth, Facts, Economics, Egalitarianism, Globalism, etc. The World is a Commons and we are all citizens of that fragile world. Period.
3
Democrats need to take a harder stand on illegal immigration. This appears to be a driving force throughout the Northern Hemisphere putting hard right philosophies in charge of countries. And why? Do we actually celebrate illegal immigration? Thanks to Climate Change denial, what has been a trickle might soon become a flood. Better get out in front of history on this one. I don't believe Democrats are all that different from Trump on illegal immigration. He's just more willing the lie about what he'll do about it. While promoting amnesty for the many already here, Democrats should advocate forcefully for closing our borders and aggressively policing future transgressions. You can be pro-immigrant without being pro-breaking-the-law.
"I have been saying for the last thousand years that the United States has only one party—the property party. It’s the party of big corporations, the party of money. It has two right wings; one is Democrat and the other is Republican."--Gore Vidal. http://www.progressive.org/mag_intv0806
Move right? That's what got Democrats in this position in the first place. Too much like Republicans, might as well vote Republucan. Democrats need to channel FDR.
6
Ross,
It sounds to me like you are in search of a political party to join yourself.
Like so many other (former?) Republicans left with the rancid taste of Trump in their mouth. It won't go away...it will just keep rotting and festering.
Well, I guess to the hard-core GOP the ends justify the means.
To the rest of us, those with a conscience, we know that the means are everything.
It sounds to me like you are in search of a political party to join yourself.
Like so many other (former?) Republicans left with the rancid taste of Trump in their mouth. It won't go away...it will just keep rotting and festering.
Well, I guess to the hard-core GOP the ends justify the means.
To the rest of us, those with a conscience, we know that the means are everything.
1
So, basically, Democrats should become moderate Republicans?
And open space for Republicans to move even more to the right, towards open fascism? Nice strategy...
What about Democrats becoming what everywhere else in the civilized world is the "normal" left - Social-Democratic party? Why not try this for once, just for giggles, like these terrible places in Northern Europe, or Germany for that matter? You know, the party that takes the best of both worlds - market economy and welfare state, and makes it work for everybody?
And leave right policies to the right parties...
And yes, I know I'm a dreamer, but I also know I'm not the only one...
And open space for Republicans to move even more to the right, towards open fascism? Nice strategy...
What about Democrats becoming what everywhere else in the civilized world is the "normal" left - Social-Democratic party? Why not try this for once, just for giggles, like these terrible places in Northern Europe, or Germany for that matter? You know, the party that takes the best of both worlds - market economy and welfare state, and makes it work for everybody?
And leave right policies to the right parties...
And yes, I know I'm a dreamer, but I also know I'm not the only one...
3
Trump won with a plurality not a majority; hence, the majority did not support him; why should democrats move right when more than half of voters were center/left. Trump was not a normal candidate--he lied and bullied his way to that plurality--being neither left nor right but abjectly false. His plurality did not vote for policies but for a false prophet in an empty suit behind Oz's curtain.
5
Yes, the right move is left. They need top get rid of Pelosi and their ineffective leadership.
2
The Democratic Party moved right in 1992 on economic issues. In 2008 we all paid the price. Perhaps 2016 will begin the re emergence of the historic Democratic Party, and over time we will all be better off.
1
2.5 million more votes for the presidency.
5 million more for the senate.
We should move more left, as well as work on a better distribution.
5 million more for the senate.
We should move more left, as well as work on a better distribution.
3
HRC won more than two million more votes than Trump. The problem is the electoral college not the message. Move right? Not unless you are moving from the East Coast to a red state in the middle of nowhere.
1
Democrats have their share of problems, moving to the right is not one of them.
You’re so fond of people having more faith, why don’t you do a column on why evangelicals lost their way?
You’re so fond of people having more faith, why don’t you do a column on why evangelicals lost their way?
2
The Democrats are frozen. They wouldn't dare vote out Pelosi. They are so entrenched in identity politics that any retreat from this position would be a complete strategic reversal. But go ahead a blame gerrymandering, or message, or argue that the party needs to go further Left. if so, the Republicans will enjoy decades of power.
3
Ms. Clinton moved to the left to satisfy the Warren-Sanders wing of the party. How did that work out? Many former Dem voters fled the party! Now the call is to move still further left, following the lead of Corbyn and the Labor Party! Meanwhile, the real world knows socialism doesn't work and even France is shifting to broadly supported pro-economic growth politicians!
3
Nice try, but the odious rightwing trajectory the DNC has been on for that last 25 years has already alienated the majority of progressives and liberals disgusted that the party of FDR & Bobby Kennedy is now the party of Wall Street, drone warfare and Gitmo. If the Democratic Party could once again be the party of liberals and progressives instead of corporate elites, they would be an indomitable force.
Nothing would be worse for the Democratic Party than to become MORE rightwing than they are right now.
Nothing would be worse for the Democratic Party than to become MORE rightwing than they are right now.
5
Hahahaha. As if the establishment Democrats haven't been moving right for decades. And the enthusiastic future of the Democratic party is moving Left.
I know Ross and other conservatives want to complete the brainwashing and conversion of what is left of the Left to the Right (wrong), but when this comes in the face of the victory of the Extreme Right Wing, it is chilling where all this is going.
Ross, you know better. Aren't you even a little afraid?
I know Ross and other conservatives want to complete the brainwashing and conversion of what is left of the Left to the Right (wrong), but when this comes in the face of the victory of the Extreme Right Wing, it is chilling where all this is going.
Ross, you know better. Aren't you even a little afraid?
3
Mr. Douthat states: "he was a hard-right candidate on certain issues but a radical sort of centrist on trade, infrastructure and entitlements, explicitly breaking with Republican orthodoxies that many voters considered out-of-date"
But a sort radical of centrist? He won the Presidency (not the election) because he ran to the LEFT (not center) as Bernie Sanders Democrat in the 3 to 4 States that gave him the necessary Electors to be inaugurated in January.
What the Democrats need to concentrate on is getting out the vote; not changing their platform.
But a sort radical of centrist? He won the Presidency (not the election) because he ran to the LEFT (not center) as Bernie Sanders Democrat in the 3 to 4 States that gave him the necessary Electors to be inaugurated in January.
What the Democrats need to concentrate on is getting out the vote; not changing their platform.
1
Ross: how about removing the electoral college and going with majority rule?
2
Move Right? Why?
The Dems got the majority of votes for the POTUS, the House and the Senate. The US population generally agrees with the Dem policies.
The Dem key is messaging. Dem messaging has always been terrible. They need a better message and a 50 state strategy. People do not know what the Dems stand for, and the Dems do not know how to tell them.
The Dems got the majority of votes for the POTUS, the House and the Senate. The US population generally agrees with the Dem policies.
The Dem key is messaging. Dem messaging has always been terrible. They need a better message and a 50 state strategy. People do not know what the Dems stand for, and the Dems do not know how to tell them.
76
Mr. Trump did not simply win the election "without the popular vote" (as Ross puts it), he lost the popular vote by two million ballots. Most voters -- in fact a margin of two million -- expressed a preference for the Democratic candidate. Who is it, really, that is out of touch here?
3
That was a lie? Misreading, if anything. Self-delusion, if anything? Or how about a principled conviction, something Douthat seems to know nothing about, prizing, as he does, political maneuvering? Is this is how it is to be in Trump land? The word "lie" is to be cleansed by making it cover any thought, word, or deed that didn't turn out to fit reality?
Yes, Democrats might move to the Right, but that would be a betrayal unworthy even of the craven acceptors of the horrors of the Trump transition.
Yes, Democrats might move to the Right, but that would be a betrayal unworthy even of the craven acceptors of the horrors of the Trump transition.
2
Laughable! If Douthat thinks that because enough people in key states voted for a lying sociopath, out of some misguided desperation, that Democrats should move to the right, he must be out of his mind.
I know you can't do the hard work of governing without winning, but unfortunately we're about to find out what the consequences of entrusting a con man, snake oil salesman with the keys to world can do.
Democrats need to continue to appeal the the best of our natures socially, and tack toward the Sanders message of economic fairness in a sensible way. This election was the victory of fear, confusion, lies, and scapegoating, and the magical thinking of easy answers to complex questions over centrist pragmatics; and nothing more.
Democrats will recover, and unfortunately the carnage of the next 4 years will have been done, but we will recover.
Repeal and replace...what a joke.
I know you can't do the hard work of governing without winning, but unfortunately we're about to find out what the consequences of entrusting a con man, snake oil salesman with the keys to world can do.
Democrats need to continue to appeal the the best of our natures socially, and tack toward the Sanders message of economic fairness in a sensible way. This election was the victory of fear, confusion, lies, and scapegoating, and the magical thinking of easy answers to complex questions over centrist pragmatics; and nothing more.
Democrats will recover, and unfortunately the carnage of the next 4 years will have been done, but we will recover.
Repeal and replace...what a joke.
5
No Ross, the Dems need to move back to the left. This election wasn't about right vs. left, this was identity politics pure and simple. The Dems just picked the wrong candidate (even though she won the popular vote). HRC was too centrist and voters wanted change. Not right vs. left, they just wanted the old guard out of DC. Foolishly they thought they would get that with Trump. They were wrong as his cabinet picks are now demonstrating. Since the primaries I have been harping in my comments that the leftist Sanders would have been a much better choice. At the risk of sounding like a Trump tweet, I think history is proving me right.
1
Right wing politics has one hallmark that no Democrat should ever embrace: working to keep the populace as ignorant and misinformed as possible (with the corollary of highly manipulated religious delusion) so as to deliver power to the plutocratic minority.
Ignorance is burying America, one elected Republican at a time.
Ignorance is burying America, one elected Republican at a time.
4
Good advice, but it looks like it will not be taken up, judging from comments thus far. a Friend of mine, a staunch Republican NAD Trump supporter (as we all know, these are not synonyms) is hoping(salivating would be a more apt term) that the Democratic party embraces Bernie, Pelosi, and Warren, which he sees cementing the destruction of 2016. Though we may well face a recession, a Trump-led infrastructure plan, a dismantling/replacement of Obamacare, tax reform and a hiatus in the constant drum of the PC crowd will ensure GOP success in the mid-terms.
1
Your advice to us concerns borders and bathrooms and what you consider entitlements. These are not the proper issues to be remedied with immediacy. The most pressing are:
climate change denial at our peril
megacorporatism writing the biotech rules
and writing the banking regulations
and all this expensive regime change abroad
Thanks for the advice, but we'll continue bringing forth the issues that are crucial to our country and our future.
climate change denial at our peril
megacorporatism writing the biotech rules
and writing the banking regulations
and all this expensive regime change abroad
Thanks for the advice, but we'll continue bringing forth the issues that are crucial to our country and our future.
The election was won in the EC and lost in the popular with bullhorn appeals to white supremacist values, not ideas. So in the face of that razor thin result, with relatively low turn out for a western democracy, especially in Latino community, you want the Democrats to act and think like you do - and wished Republican did, rather than (R)s being the amoral agglomerated tribe it is now.
Nah. Mr. Bouie's piece is the obvious answer. The only thing holding it back as adopted strategy is white Democrats have their own set of issues with letting go of white supremacy.
Of course none of this is a gallop leftward. The only galloping the US has done for decades is rightward (other than a few precisely carved out social issues.) You folks on the right are your own worst enemies building up all this extra potential energy. When the long overdue swing happens, it may just gallop.
By the way. What you pejoratively call "identity politics" is just absence of white supremacy. Carving out special rules for the Catholic Church when in its role as an employer.... Now there is a heavy-duty example of of icky Identity Politics. Religions weakening public support for public education - another example.
Nah. Mr. Bouie's piece is the obvious answer. The only thing holding it back as adopted strategy is white Democrats have their own set of issues with letting go of white supremacy.
Of course none of this is a gallop leftward. The only galloping the US has done for decades is rightward (other than a few precisely carved out social issues.) You folks on the right are your own worst enemies building up all this extra potential energy. When the long overdue swing happens, it may just gallop.
By the way. What you pejoratively call "identity politics" is just absence of white supremacy. Carving out special rules for the Catholic Church when in its role as an employer.... Now there is a heavy-duty example of of icky Identity Politics. Religions weakening public support for public education - another example.
Today, Mr. Douthat adds his voice to the that of David Brooks claiming that salvation lies in a move to the center. And Times readers are again left to wonder, "What world do these guys live in?" Can anyone seriously believe that the problem of "worklessness" in contemporary society is a product of our welfare programs - programs which were never robust and have only grown thinner during decades of neoliberal dominance? News flash, Mr. Douthat - within a decade millions of decent job in the transportation industry will be lost to technology. Within two decades tens of millions of jobs (in the white collar world as much as the blue) will be lost to the next wave of automation. Do you really believe that our present economic framework and some central point along a spectrum of 70 year-old economic theories provides us with the resources to deal with that? Arguing that we should be playing the game between the forty yard lines always cloaks one in an aura of reasonableness.....unfortunately, Mr. Douthat, the stadium we are playing in is in the process of crumbling around us.
5
Do you really think that the Trump and GOP forces soon to be in power are going to let the Democrats do anything in the next four years? This is just Mr Douthat's wishful thinking. Many of us out here in the trenches of real life feel we have been baited and switched by our President-elect. This kind of opining leaves me cold and unimpressed.
Move to the right? If you consider that African-American household incomes have actually declined over the last eight years - an embarassing and horrendous outcome, even with a very well-intended President - absolutely.
1
Trump did not run as a standard republican with whom you could argue over medicare, or the need for infrastructure that dems have been pushing for 8 years. He fooled just enough folks who could not see that he is card carrying member of the 1 percent who will gut their safety net for fun and profit.
1
If anything the Democrats should move left, back to the FDR heritage so squandered by DLC centrism under Clinton, Clinton and Obama
5
So we have a president-elect with fascist tendencies about to take office, and Mr Douthat asks whether Democrats can find their way to moving right. Suffice it to say, that's not the question many of us Democrats are worrying about just now.
2
Judging from a lot of the post-election commentary, especially this one, you'd think that the Dems lost those key swing states in the Rust Belt by a large margin rather than the razor thin reality. We should not generalize based on small margins that were also impacted by racist voter suppression laws engineered by the white party called the GOP. But let's face it, Hillary ran a bad campaign, and, as a woman loaded with a lot of unfair baggage from years of GOP abuse, she was the wrong candidate to have in a year when the Republicans were ready to vote for anybody, even a nutjob like Trump, with an R next to his name.
Now answer this: how are the Democrats going to jettison social liberalism when the Republican answer to their slim victory based on race, misogyny etc will be to institute even more voter suppression laws targeting minorities? They shouldn't.
Now answer this: how are the Democrats going to jettison social liberalism when the Republican answer to their slim victory based on race, misogyny etc will be to institute even more voter suppression laws targeting minorities? They shouldn't.
1
The Democrats have moved right or rephrase have coddled the rich. Where is the luxury tax, a real estate tax, real tax brackets in an era of 25million yearly salaries? Where are public sector jobs? How about maintenance not just construction? (Look at the dirty NYC subways stupidly painted with black ceiling -- not white which even cavemen knew to use. (PS -- increased gas tax in NJ --a regressive tax... for the little people. You can create overly paid jobs -- five guys watch, one guy works -- building infrastructure. Then the jobs disappear.... and deterioration begins. Come to S.Ohio and lets look at federal housing -- the new bldgs. with the rusting balconies. The old post WWII public housing seems to keep on going with some maintenance. But where are the paint stripes on the roads and why did the Water Dept. figure out a super expensive way to bill monthly not quarterly using expensive stationary not posts. Plenty of corruption in a city of 25K -- often well hidden. Factories long gone. Hospitals largest employer; also a state university competing with others nearby. Shop out of municipality at Walmart and Home Depot. Kroger is in town. Lots of opioid now heroin addiction..... has this replaced alcohol? Go and really understand Appalachia before you blither on.... and also stop accepting all these giant price tags for fixing everything. You can get a perfectly useable computer like my Lenovo ideapad for less than 150$, NYTs! Third party time.
1
Interesting that you can't give an example of a conservative moving to the center. Trump doesn't count. He never held public office so has no record to run on. The title of this column should be Can the Dems stop moving to the right.
As for Obama's drift to the left? Mr "we have to tighten our belts" who's signature legislation came out of the Heritage Foundation (ACA)?
You lost me there.
As for Obama's drift to the left? Mr "we have to tighten our belts" who's signature legislation came out of the Heritage Foundation (ACA)?
You lost me there.
2
Outside of suggesting a "pause" in culture wars, this op-ed is remarkably vague on substance. No specific policies are given as examples, and so it's tough to understand what "talk[ing] anew about the virtues of earned benefits" would actually mean. I think that if 2016 taught us anything, it's that running a campaign tailored to your base is a more likely avenue towards success. HRC's campaign tried to pick up moderate Republicans, and ultimately most (or not enough) of these voters voted Democrat. Who knows what the future holds, but if I were a campaign strategist, my money would be on tacking left to win more votes rather than right.
1
I don't know whether the Democrats need to move more to the right, but I'm quite sure they need to find better ways to communicate to those disaffected white voters who, as Ross said, voted for Trump reluctantly. That wouldn't be selling out. Rather, it would recognize the need to fight more effectively against the right wing's march toward fascism. Trump has the ear of far too many Americans, a potentially deadly state of affairs.
1
The transgender bathroom situation was entirely from the Republican side. When republicans tried to limit the rights of a group of people, democrats stepped in to uphold those rights. It is completely disingenuous to paint that as some sort of democrat hand-wringing and implore dems to drop this issue.
Secondly, there are more poor white people than other races, and they are the ones that will feel the effects of losing the social safety net.
While radical Islamic terrorism is an issue, what about the Dylan Roofs of America and everyone that's worried about them?
Secondly, there are more poor white people than other races, and they are the ones that will feel the effects of losing the social safety net.
While radical Islamic terrorism is an issue, what about the Dylan Roofs of America and everyone that's worried about them?
1
I didnt read article. Not only did dems win pop vote, they lost in part because the candidate was a right wing democrat...move right? I hope you eat your crow.
1
The Democrats did move right, which is why they are in the state they are with working people.
5
Not not even going to bother reading this Ross, the title alone is asanine. I myself may be a center-left Dem, but many Dems are not. All the Democratic Party has done since 1992 is move to the right. Tony Blair and WJC's "Third Way" governing was just another way of saying "we're pushing the party to the right." I understand that you are upset that your own party has been hijacked by a populist demagogue, but don't turn the Democratic Party into the new Republican one (it's already almost there).
2
Conspicuous in its absence from Mr. Douthout's normal judgement that everybody should just move to the right to somehow balance our ship was any mention of TPP, the ultimate in Neo-liberalist pharmacology, force fed to the country by Mr. Obama, the Republican Party and a few enablers among the Democrats (in NY particularly Greg Meeks and Kathleen a Rice).
Could it be that but for having to carry the weight of that around her neck Ms. Clinton would have prevailed in this election? Sober observers in the rust belt could easily come to that conclusion.
Could it be that but for having to carry the weight of that around her neck Ms. Clinton would have prevailed in this election? Sober observers in the rust belt could easily come to that conclusion.
Can the Democrats move right? Hmm.
Let's remember the behaviors of the Republican presidential candidates over the last many months. That evening when three of the most politically "Christian" candidates, Cruz, Huckabee, and Jindal, shared the stage with and pandered to a ranting pastor (Kevin Swanson) who called for the execution of all gays in America. Then, those debates ... mostly boy fights, name calling. And the faces of Trump supporters at those rallies, the hot chants, the jeering and outbreaks of violence, largely orchestrated and channeled by Mr. Trump. Those vulgar t-shirts calling for Hillary to be violated in many different ways.
And we can tell what the GOP will offer the country now by checking out Donald Trump's new appointments, and the far-right bona fides of his vice-president. There will be less access to affordable contraception and safe abortions for women. Many citizens will find themselves without health insurance. And why not privatize Medicare and get that money back into the pockets of entrepreneurs, where it belongs? Taxes for the rich will be reduced. The social safety net for the poor will be slashed.
You, Mr. Douthat, frequently speak about your faith. Why don't you turn around and judge your own cruel party, sir, before offering kindly paternal advice to Democrats? Look hard into the empty greedy eyes of our next president ... your candidate. Then write a new column.
Let's remember the behaviors of the Republican presidential candidates over the last many months. That evening when three of the most politically "Christian" candidates, Cruz, Huckabee, and Jindal, shared the stage with and pandered to a ranting pastor (Kevin Swanson) who called for the execution of all gays in America. Then, those debates ... mostly boy fights, name calling. And the faces of Trump supporters at those rallies, the hot chants, the jeering and outbreaks of violence, largely orchestrated and channeled by Mr. Trump. Those vulgar t-shirts calling for Hillary to be violated in many different ways.
And we can tell what the GOP will offer the country now by checking out Donald Trump's new appointments, and the far-right bona fides of his vice-president. There will be less access to affordable contraception and safe abortions for women. Many citizens will find themselves without health insurance. And why not privatize Medicare and get that money back into the pockets of entrepreneurs, where it belongs? Taxes for the rich will be reduced. The social safety net for the poor will be slashed.
You, Mr. Douthat, frequently speak about your faith. Why don't you turn around and judge your own cruel party, sir, before offering kindly paternal advice to Democrats? Look hard into the empty greedy eyes of our next president ... your candidate. Then write a new column.
2
Mr. Douthat frames his argument in terms of "left" and "right." Framing arguments with this language was fine 20 years ago, but not today.
It's not about "Left" and "Right." it's about "pro-worker" and "anti-worker."
The Democrats can regain power if they are perceived as the party that fights for working people in America. Too many Democrats over the past couple decades went along with the Republican establishment and supported free trade deals and deregulation that hurt working people.
So along comes Trump, who is fighting to keep Ford and Carrier from laying off people. That makes him a hero to many working people. How many Presidents in memory - Democrat and Republican - directly intervened to prevent layoffs? I can't think of one. Democrats should take note.
I think Trump's policies will hurt working people in the long run. Working people will feel betrayed, creating an opportunity for Democrats to win back workers. The only question is: will the Democrats take advantage?
It's not about "Left" and "Right." it's about "pro-worker" and "anti-worker."
The Democrats can regain power if they are perceived as the party that fights for working people in America. Too many Democrats over the past couple decades went along with the Republican establishment and supported free trade deals and deregulation that hurt working people.
So along comes Trump, who is fighting to keep Ford and Carrier from laying off people. That makes him a hero to many working people. How many Presidents in memory - Democrat and Republican - directly intervened to prevent layoffs? I can't think of one. Democrats should take note.
I think Trump's policies will hurt working people in the long run. Working people will feel betrayed, creating an opportunity for Democrats to win back workers. The only question is: will the Democrats take advantage?
59
After 4 years of serious Trump damage, the country will be eager to establish some normality and will definitely return to the Democratic fold. Hillary was unpopular. Next time around let's hope the Democratic party will select someone who can accurately read the tea leaves. (If there is anything left of the country to run.)
Of course its obvious the Democrats should become even more like the Republicans! Forget being a "workers" party the Demo's can continue the rightward drift Bill Clinton started. Just look at how well its paid off. Time to really battle the GOP for that special interest gold.
5
In a time of massive income inequality, cataclysmic climate change and rampant gun violence radical action is needed. Democrats should stick to the left, not reach for the center. We lost this election due to a damaged messenger, not a damaged message.
55
Can Republicans survive a fascist takeover?
6
In other words, "compromise" by becoming more like Republicans, right?
Perhaps attitudes and directions need to change but at this point, I think the Democrats need to find new faces to present their changes in direction. I am impressed with Bernie Sanders but here again, we need to put a younger face before the public. At this point, while the Democrats pick up their wounded, a hard look at the people involved would be a big help. We need charisma and a whole lot of brains.
Perhaps attitudes and directions need to change but at this point, I think the Democrats need to find new faces to present their changes in direction. I am impressed with Bernie Sanders but here again, we need to put a younger face before the public. At this point, while the Democrats pick up their wounded, a hard look at the people involved would be a big help. We need charisma and a whole lot of brains.
6
For the Democratic Party, it's not about moving right. It's about coming down from the ivory tower and walking a mile in the shoes of lower- and middle-class everyday Americans. And, it's about actually standing for something, rather than just whining and sniveling.
Can we stop with the left-right thing? It's an anachronism.
Can we stop with the left-right thing? It's an anachronism.
5
Remember in 2008 when Ross was calling for the Republicans to turn Left? Me neither.
Aint no way you can take a race this close and make any presumption - but you go right ahead and try.
Aint no way you can take a race this close and make any presumption - but you go right ahead and try.
5
Does the line, "But that was a lie." refer to the fact that Bill Clinton and Lawrence Summers deregulated the financial markets against the advice of Joseph Stiglitz, a true American hero along with Paul Krugman. Most Americans don't recognize these names, or understand the implications of their critique of Republican policy, which is distinctly NOT CONSERVATIVE. Stiglitz and Krugman are not only brilliant but believe the vulnerable should be protected. Even in "liberal Vermont" the lie persists in the statistics which show a significant increase in the children of Windham County who need foster care. A DISTINCT lack of jobs, deficient public education (not one size fits all the Bush and Obama administrations (Race to the Top Arne Duncan, are you kidding me?), and a heroin and crack epidemic of seismic proportion. I implore Democrats to apologize to the working class and the poor and have the GUTS to structure a health care program oriented toward health, not illness, and rejects the "medical-industrial complex" as embodied by the PHARMA.
1
The answer is NO.
Electing Donald Trump is a Huge Royal mess.
They wanted him and they got him, suddenly Bill Kristol seems to be a reasonable man.
In the mean time I am going to look forward to the rising of Mr. Bernie Sanders, a very shrewd Politician who played his cards right. From a Hillary Clinton supporter like myself there is absolutely no time to lose.
In American Woman`s age is always a factor but not with Men.
Us the Democrats are moving on to 2020 .
Electing Donald Trump is a Huge Royal mess.
They wanted him and they got him, suddenly Bill Kristol seems to be a reasonable man.
In the mean time I am going to look forward to the rising of Mr. Bernie Sanders, a very shrewd Politician who played his cards right. From a Hillary Clinton supporter like myself there is absolutely no time to lose.
In American Woman`s age is always a factor but not with Men.
Us the Democrats are moving on to 2020 .
2
Most commenters below have not yet grasped the fact that they do not have the answers that a free, work-inclined, citizenry wants.
"Just double down!"
Open your eyes. HRC and Bob Dole are similar. Both felt it was "their turn" to be President. HRC's time was 2008, and she was flawed then-
Stay out of bathrooms, and try to promote jobs!
"Just double down!"
Open your eyes. HRC and Bob Dole are similar. Both felt it was "their turn" to be President. HRC's time was 2008, and she was flawed then-
Stay out of bathrooms, and try to promote jobs!
3
Given the likely disruptive changes coming in the next few months the Democratic party would do well to throw down its marker with respect to the social safety net. Clinton, essentially running as Obama's third term, won the popular vote by a sizable margin. However, Trump's pathological hubris will demand he declare the election a mandate and impose a radical agenda with regards to MediCare and Social Security that's just not there. The Democratic party must reaffirm its commitment to the New Deal and the Great Society, not run away from it. Now more than ever.
3
The Democrats won the popular vote by a lot.
I agree with those who say it isn't a case of moving right, but of opening their eyes to the suffering of the very poor and those pushed out of good jobs in the midwest.
As the Republicans take away health care, and get us in another shooting war, maybe with Iran, in order to loot the treasury, it is the responsibility of the Democratic Party to take the Rights past tactics and use them, including absolute war in Congress.
Hugh Massengill, Eugene Oregon
I agree with those who say it isn't a case of moving right, but of opening their eyes to the suffering of the very poor and those pushed out of good jobs in the midwest.
As the Republicans take away health care, and get us in another shooting war, maybe with Iran, in order to loot the treasury, it is the responsibility of the Democratic Party to take the Rights past tactics and use them, including absolute war in Congress.
Hugh Massengill, Eugene Oregon
2
There's some insight here, but as the comments demonstrate, it's not likely to get reocognized.
1
The hardest/harshest truth in this debacle is that the democrats had a deeply flawed candidate. Hillary, against all her experience, lost credibility amongst many of the young democrats - who do not need to move to the right - for reasons easy to grasp. She has already moved far to the right by virtue of taking ungodly "speaking" fees from the the ones the young know one must not cozy up with: the crooked bankers and special interests! Add a cultivated arrogance, a smudge of grandstanding and a smidgen of sanctimoniousness and you see how a sense of repulsion for a person translated into a conviction of the whole body of democrats.
Had Sanders been given the attention his admirable message and life-long amazing experience, be that by the media or by the derelict leadership of the DNC, he would have trounced Trump, whose character is crawling through the gutter yet is a skilled stage actor who pleased the lowest sentiments in an angry and ignorant, fooled and vengeful electorate.
So, it would help not to bamboozle the democratic agenda beyond Sander's proposals and allow him to select a cadre of leaders who will keep integrity at the helm of democratic party leadership. Sanders is a true leader, Hillary was not; she forfeited her integrity; the proof is in her 50 million dollar fortune which she definitely did not earn. Character is not for sale! We should rally behind Sanders and help the Democratic Party reform!
Had Sanders been given the attention his admirable message and life-long amazing experience, be that by the media or by the derelict leadership of the DNC, he would have trounced Trump, whose character is crawling through the gutter yet is a skilled stage actor who pleased the lowest sentiments in an angry and ignorant, fooled and vengeful electorate.
So, it would help not to bamboozle the democratic agenda beyond Sander's proposals and allow him to select a cadre of leaders who will keep integrity at the helm of democratic party leadership. Sanders is a true leader, Hillary was not; she forfeited her integrity; the proof is in her 50 million dollar fortune which she definitely did not earn. Character is not for sale! We should rally behind Sanders and help the Democratic Party reform!
Does anyone really believe that Mr. Douthat is someone to pay attention to when it comes to Democratic strategy. He clearly mischaracterizes the party's positions on several fronts and has no idea about the values behind the Democratic Party's positions. Does the party need to focus on basics and not let itself be distracted by strange debates about bathrooms? Yes, without in any way missing the point of what is behind the such debates and how important they are to the vulnerable whom the effect. The party should make its position clear and then let local forces -- local chapters of the ACLU, Human Rights Campaign, etc -- fight the tactical fights. The party first and foremost must return to basics: jobs, real respect for the working class, and a rejection of elitism without insulting our intelligence a la Mr. Trump. But more informed party leaders with values get that. Mr. Douthat's advice is disingenuous, superfluous and insincere.
12
"For instance the Democratics could attempt to declare a culture-war truce, consolidating the gains of the Obama era while disavowing attempts to regulate institutions and communities that don't follow the currrent social liberal line."
A truce, Mr. Douthat? You want me to renounce tolerance, a basic tenet of liberalism, in favor of identity politics of grievances based on race ("They treat illegals better than we Americans").
I'm sorry but your well meaning advice falls on deaf ears when you ask liberals to triangulate principles like a woman's right to choose, based on the practices of a private religious community that enters the healthcare marketplace with intolerant notions of groupthink.
No, over the next four years, let the populace digest the Republican response to a crisis every new government faces. Let's see what our repudiations of immigration or our century long support for public education brings. Trump won on pitting one group against the other; a tenet of intolerance, exclusion instead of inclusion.
A truce, Mr. Douthat? You want me to renounce tolerance, a basic tenet of liberalism, in favor of identity politics of grievances based on race ("They treat illegals better than we Americans").
I'm sorry but your well meaning advice falls on deaf ears when you ask liberals to triangulate principles like a woman's right to choose, based on the practices of a private religious community that enters the healthcare marketplace with intolerant notions of groupthink.
No, over the next four years, let the populace digest the Republican response to a crisis every new government faces. Let's see what our repudiations of immigration or our century long support for public education brings. Trump won on pitting one group against the other; a tenet of intolerance, exclusion instead of inclusion.
7
What an infuriating piece of twisted logic. What party has refused to compromise for eight straight years? Not only refused to compromise but actively obstructed every piece of legislation not originating from its own ilk?
Honestly Douthat, you either don't have a clue about what liberals are all about or you simply believe the only way for the country "move forward" is tow the increasingly reactionary Republican right wing.
It is arrogant and ignorant of you to broadbrush liberals as a whole. Have your say about democrats in congress who long ago caved in to right wing philosophy, but you cannot speak for the liberal population at large. You don't know us, you have no interest in finding out about us, and yet you are quite pleased pigeon-holing us into your own misinformed definition of what constitutes a "liberal."
And one last thing, you Mr. Douthat, along with Cal Thomas and all the other right wing pundits who have been bashing Obama and the "elite" left for eight years are indeed amongs the most very elite in this country. How many of us have the platform you have? Just about zero. You are an elite among elitists and all the hysterical hyperbole about left wing snots rings loudly of dispicible hypocrisy and distorted self-righeousness.
Honestly Douthat, you either don't have a clue about what liberals are all about or you simply believe the only way for the country "move forward" is tow the increasingly reactionary Republican right wing.
It is arrogant and ignorant of you to broadbrush liberals as a whole. Have your say about democrats in congress who long ago caved in to right wing philosophy, but you cannot speak for the liberal population at large. You don't know us, you have no interest in finding out about us, and yet you are quite pleased pigeon-holing us into your own misinformed definition of what constitutes a "liberal."
And one last thing, you Mr. Douthat, along with Cal Thomas and all the other right wing pundits who have been bashing Obama and the "elite" left for eight years are indeed amongs the most very elite in this country. How many of us have the platform you have? Just about zero. You are an elite among elitists and all the hysterical hyperbole about left wing snots rings loudly of dispicible hypocrisy and distorted self-righeousness.
5
Just supposing they did this, why would they still be Democrats? At a certain point, a shift to the Right simply means that there is no Left party left. Does that mean the cultural, economic, social, and scientific problems the Left identifies as real causes, deserving justice and civic mindedness, would vanish? At some point the Right is going to have to confront the fact that there are blind spots in its worldview. I'd submit that the Left talks about those blind spots.
5
The Democratic Party needs to have the courage of its convictions, whatever they turn out to be, coming out of this disaster. And it needs a charismatic leader. In this powerful but terribly immature country, nothing seems to appeal to most voters but personal magnetism.
Except for Paul Ryan, that is; apparently the only policy wonk who can get elected is a fake one.
Except for Paul Ryan, that is; apparently the only policy wonk who can get elected is a fake one.
3
Let's see. We moved right, and Bush drove us into a ditch. We got out of the ditch, and have now jumped over the right wing cliff with Trump. Is Douthat looking for an abyss at the bottom of the canyon? We have campaign strategists aplenty to work on the stupidity we can practice in order to win elections. Can we please have columnists who speak to the qeustion of what we should be doing? (HINT: it is not moving to the right...)
7
Douthat doesn't get it. Democrats care about our fellow man. We are egalitarians. We are altruistic. We are happy to share our bounties. We respect the inherent rights of all humanity. The right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We interpret those basic rights at their true definition. We don't accept some definition manufactured by an overbearing, pompous republican or like-minded fanatic.
2
If the Left and the Right could both start to act Human, we could , maybe, put together a country where we would all still want to live.
Why would Democrats move further to the right and embrace a homophobic, misogynistic, pro-wealthy anti-government stance? We already have Republicans for all that. The Democrats have to drop their neoliberal ways and get back to their roots of actually putting people first. That means a significant lurch back to the left. The Democrats have been creeping further rightward for the last thirty years as the Republicans creep further to the right. Who would have thought that the Democratic position was to champion charter schools and create a health care mandate that enriches insurance companies while doing nothing to contain costs? Who would have thought that a Democratic president would stand by while an oil pipeline was built right through Lakota territory, ignoring the injustice being perpetrated on the rightful owners of the land? No. We have to make the long, hard slog back to the left, towards compassion and doing what's right for the people of this country and not just the wealthy.
5
The whole premise of this piece is ridiculous. Democrats has been "moving Right" for decades:
Beginning with William Jefferson Clinton's Right-ward march to out-right the Right; his hard-Right-remake of "Eliminating Welfare As We Know It" stance; his laying the foundation for the failed Drug-war-incarceration-economy. Each and every Democrat since has run away from the label of Liberal as if it was a chronic disease; allowing Republicans to define it for them. Now we have a one party system comprised of hard-right, ultra-right; extreme-right;tea-party- neo-alt-racist-right Republicans and DINO's: Democrats refuse to define themselves and wonder why 32 States now belong to Republican led Governorship and Republican dominated legislatures. No; the right-side of the pews have already been filled.
Beginning with William Jefferson Clinton's Right-ward march to out-right the Right; his hard-Right-remake of "Eliminating Welfare As We Know It" stance; his laying the foundation for the failed Drug-war-incarceration-economy. Each and every Democrat since has run away from the label of Liberal as if it was a chronic disease; allowing Republicans to define it for them. Now we have a one party system comprised of hard-right, ultra-right; extreme-right;tea-party- neo-alt-racist-right Republicans and DINO's: Democrats refuse to define themselves and wonder why 32 States now belong to Republican led Governorship and Republican dominated legislatures. No; the right-side of the pews have already been filled.
5
The republicans have broken our national political system through gerrymandering, and now Russ, with typical republican (lack of) strength of conviction, tells us that the solution is to change our stance to accommodate what is wrong rather working to correct it.
"We own the refs, so here's how you guys will now need to play"
"We own the refs, so here's how you guys will now need to play"
5
The Democrats should do to the Republicans what the Republicans did to them. Obstruct everything and then blame the other party for not getting anything accomplished. The Democrats should copy this winning strategy. No need to emulate any other ideas from the do nothing, know nothing Republican party. This winning tactic got the GOP the most unqualified Republican elected to the Presidency. Nice job.
5
Mr Douthat---The Democrats have been moving right for decades after a 'golden age' of liberalism from FDR through Carter. Move any further right, and they will be tripping over Atilla the Hun and other past right wing notables. If you want to see a remarkable liberal political document of that bygone era, much to the left of the current Democratic mainstream, I suggest you look at the GOP platform of 1956.
3
I don't know the liberals Ross is talking about. I know many others, who aren't concerned about gay marriage or transgenders in bathrooms. They ARE concerned about jobs going overseas, keeping the right to choose, the ridiculous ease with which terrorists can buy firearms, a deteriorating infrastructure, a declining social security fund, unaffordable medical insurance, insurance companies refusing to insure those with pre-existing conditions or who have cost the insurers a lot of money, polluted air and water, the inability to regulate campaign spending and the huge cost overruns in military spending. Are these concerns so left wing that they are turning off the average voter?
3
"That would mean no more fines for Catholic charities and hospitals, no more transgender-bathroom directives handed down from the White House to local schools..."
Most of this column is just simple-minded and wrong (typical of this columnist), but this excerpt is cruel. Real people, including children, are harmed by the daily bigotry that these policies are meant to address, putting them on hold over perceived political expedience is simply wrong.
Most of this column is just simple-minded and wrong (typical of this columnist), but this excerpt is cruel. Real people, including children, are harmed by the daily bigotry that these policies are meant to address, putting them on hold over perceived political expedience is simply wrong.
2
Democrats need to be Democrats, not GOP light.
6
America does not need two Republican parties, one far looney right and one just far right. And the reason the Democrats are lost at sea is because the DC Dem. elite decided long ago to embrace Wall Street, real estate developers, free trade corporatists and effectively abandoned the 50 million + service workers in America who work at poverty wages with no benefits many of whom live in rural counties. This is where the struggle for the future of the Democratic party will be found - in the end it's about class.
3
Ross, please explain to me why the Dems won the popular vote and picked up seats in both houses of Congress. Maybe they are on the right path and PEOTUS Voldemort is bringing us down the wrong path?
4
Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by over 2 million votes, more votes were cast for Democrats in the House and Senate...why do you feel a need to tell the democratic Party that they need to change? What needs to be changed is how they game the system to their advantage...certainly the redistricting of House districts has helped the Republicans enormously. But, be careful about making sweeping changes to democratic policy to win the last election.
3
That would be a mistake for the democrats to move right. The Liberal Party in Canada tried it two elections in a row and lost. When they finally gave up trying to be conservative light, they won the election with Mr. Trudeau. After all, the enthusiasm in the Democrat party was Sanders and despite him trying to endorse Clinton after he lost the nomination most his supporters stayed home or voted third party for this election. That's why the democrats lost.
6
They stayed home or voted third party....so they got Trump. They wanted Bernie and couldn't get him so they decided to elect Trump by default. What does that say about them? The answer: that they are more concerned about personality that they are about policy. When the women who didn't vote or voted for third-parties lose their reproductive rights under a trump administration, they can look in the mirror to understand why.
What does the Ryan-McConnell apparatus or Trump have to do with the "right" or "conservatism"? Ross has some dreams that his views are being vindicated, but they aren't even on the table for discussion. What is at play is the disassembly of democracy and emasculation of government. The GOP is OK with it, being the creature of the 1/4%, but the Democrats actually are for Democracy.
6
It's hard to see how the Democrats could benefit by a move further to the right after losing with a moderate such as Clinton.
5
She did not run on a moderate voice.
1
Totally true.
The first thing Democrats have to do is to stop labeling people as racists, xenophobes, misogynists and other titles just because they have different opinions about certain cultural and social issues. How can Democrats assume that they, and only they, have all the right answers. A lot has been made about why they lost the votes of white men. Their push for transgender men to use women's restrooms and locker rooms was a huge mistake. Men who may have been willing to accept same sex marriage could not tolerate the idea of their wives or daughters having their privacy invaded. This is just one example but it shows that in the future Democrats need to downplay the social identity thing.
1
Unfortunately, the Dems will have a chance to make a big step in the right direction today, but they will fail to make the bold move. The re-election of Nancy Pelosi to lead the House Dems will be a huge error. The Dems do a very poor job of developing and promoting their bench, and they are losing an opportunity to put some fresh faces, ideas, and energy in front to the American people. There are far too many elected Dems (and GOPers, too) who hold on to office too long. Let's get some fresh blood into the arena.
3
You wish, Ross. Not too long ago you were wringing your hands about the demographic death spiral of the GOP. Fact is, American voters are fickle. After a couple of years of the disastrous policies Trump will unleash, the mid-term elections will have you back in chicken little land.
5
A Practical Proposal----
Maybe Democrats just need to follow the current example and run as Republicans, even though they live their lives as liberals. If you can't get elected as a Democrat in the
midwest or south, change parties so you "look" like a Republican so you have a chance of getting elected. Next, all Democrats should just sign up to be part of the Republican
Party and then reshape it in their image, like the Dixiecrats did to the party of Lincoln 50 years ago. It's easier than changing minds from outside of the loyalty circle.
Maybe Democrats just need to follow the current example and run as Republicans, even though they live their lives as liberals. If you can't get elected as a Democrat in the
midwest or south, change parties so you "look" like a Republican so you have a chance of getting elected. Next, all Democrats should just sign up to be part of the Republican
Party and then reshape it in their image, like the Dixiecrats did to the party of Lincoln 50 years ago. It's easier than changing minds from outside of the loyalty circle.
You're moving to the right.
We're moving to the left.
Hillary Clinton=2.3 million more votes than Trump.
Trump is a kleptocrat, but no pushback from you or Brooks on that.
Mnuchin is the worst of Wall Street, that Trump ran against: Goldman Sachs royalty, hedge fund, mortgage shyster.
Privatize Medicare???
Trump ran as a populist, to the left, on keeping Medicare whole, keeping Social Security whole, making healthcare available for everyone, railing against Goldman Sachs and hedge fund guys. That's what got him elected.
To reiterate: Trump received 2.3 million less votes than Hillary.
You do not have a mandate.
I'm fighting back.
We're moving to the left.
Hillary Clinton=2.3 million more votes than Trump.
Trump is a kleptocrat, but no pushback from you or Brooks on that.
Mnuchin is the worst of Wall Street, that Trump ran against: Goldman Sachs royalty, hedge fund, mortgage shyster.
Privatize Medicare???
Trump ran as a populist, to the left, on keeping Medicare whole, keeping Social Security whole, making healthcare available for everyone, railing against Goldman Sachs and hedge fund guys. That's what got him elected.
To reiterate: Trump received 2.3 million less votes than Hillary.
You do not have a mandate.
I'm fighting back.
25
It's hard to judge what voters really want, because gerrymandering and voter suppression are strangling their voices.
12
Also, low population states are ridiculously over represented in the Senate. More people live in my county than live in Wyoming. My state still gets the same number of Senators. How about the tyranny of the minority.
This election was the "old white man's last stand". Whatever Trump undoes will be undone, demographics tell the tale of the future. Losing popular vote makes for a weak president.
13
Tempting perscription, but no. Clinton lost because she would have lost to any Republican. This was one woman's personal defeat. Democrats will recover now that the Clintons are gone from the scene.
6
By moving right I assume you mean becoming a party of the billionaires, by the billionaires and for the billionaires.
15
Oh great, lets move the Dem's to the right and get rid of yet another check and balance. Sure, there's room for improvement, always, but no one nor party is perfect (except Trump and the republicans). Hillary was one of the most unpopular candidates in history and still stomped Trump in the popular vote. Rather than throwing the baby out with the bathtub, perhaps the Dem's can improve the appeal of their candidate, it wouldn't take much, all due respect.
7
If the Democrat party moved any more to the left they would become Nixon Republicans instead of the Rockefeller Republicans they are today.
The "hard truth" that Republicans AND Democrats need to face is that Mr. Trump won the 2016 election by playing the class card... and the Republicans should expect the Democrats to play that card again in 2020 when Mr. Trump's Billionaire Cabinet rips the social safety net to shreds, lines the pockets of the .1%, and does nothing to help those who elected him.
The "hard truth" that Republicans AND Democrats need to face is that Mr. Trump won the 2016 election by playing the class card... and the Republicans should expect the Democrats to play that card again in 2020 when Mr. Trump's Billionaire Cabinet rips the social safety net to shreds, lines the pockets of the .1%, and does nothing to help those who elected him.
13
I'm getting a serious case of deja vu concerning the so-called negotiations that preceded the 2013 government shutdown. Back then there was a lot of talk about Democrats accommodating the Republicans, which sounded good at the time. The reality, however, was that when Democrats moved toward the Right, Republicans then insisted that they move FURTHER to the Right.
"Move rightward"? Not gonna happen.
"Move rightward"? Not gonna happen.
10
The Democratic party recruited the Blue Dogs only to decide that there was not enough room in the tent for the new comers. Broadening the coalition is more complicated than you acknowledge. The problem with the Democratic Party is the Alt Left.
3
This is a use of one of the failed and fraudulent equity lies that reagan et al introduced as part of their changing of how grammar was used to hide the glaring truth about what their values actually were.
The problem with the DEMs losing working people comes from the fact that out of fear for not understanding how reagan got elected they are now further right than the ultra right wing reagan was and have been since Bill Clinton was POTUS.
There is no alt left there is no comparative on the other side from the sick degenerate same ol same ol racist xenophobic republican mainstream values which are for some reason being labelled as something new. The only new thing is the names the words and behaviors are the same as ever was.
The problem with the DEMs losing working people comes from the fact that out of fear for not understanding how reagan got elected they are now further right than the ultra right wing reagan was and have been since Bill Clinton was POTUS.
There is no alt left there is no comparative on the other side from the sick degenerate same ol same ol racist xenophobic republican mainstream values which are for some reason being labelled as something new. The only new thing is the names the words and behaviors are the same as ever was.
Sorry, Ross, but this Democrat refuses to dumb down and buy into the lies of the right-wing propaganda machine's racism and xenophobia. I would rather work at correcting the gerrymandering and voter suppression that allowed the less-popular party to prevail. And I hope Democrats will remain vigilant and not give in to Trump's ignorant anti-democratic administration as it tries to undo our hard-won progress.
17
The very premise of this article is incorrect. "That kind of movement is often part of how political parties recover from debilitation and defeat — not just by finding new ways to be true to their underlying ideology, but by scrambling toward the center to convince skeptical voters that they’ve changed." Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by 2 million votes! 54% of the country voted AGAINST Donald Trump. Jill Stein's votes alone would have turned Wisconsin to Hillary's column. I'm all for having debates about what Democrats can do better, but drawing conclusions from the margins, the tipping point as it were, in the electoral college, those troglodytes who turned out to vote their hateful vision of America who'd been sitting on the sidelines for years because no one until Donald Trump represented their "views" is NOT the way forward. Especially I might add, for the Republican Party, let alone our wonderful Democratic Party.
8
Yeah, Right. Typical Republican chutzpah. "Fix" the Democrats so they become the Alan Combes to the GOP's Sean Hannity, the New York Generals to the Harlem Globetrotters. Designated punching bag. Thanks, but no thanks.
Republicans have taken over the nation through hard, grinding work in the trenches, through billionaires funding state and local campaigns nobody usually cares about (think Art Pope in North Carolina), good voter turn-out, and, of course, the piece de resistance, blatant voter suppression techniques to deny and discourage Democratic turnout. It's worked. But in all that, the one thing they did NOT do was move to the center (ie, left). So why should Democrats move to the right?
The Democratic Party has tried that and EVERY TIME it has failed. Yet this is what a REPUBLICAN commentator suggests. And it's just plain wrong.
No, Democrats need to copy the Republican model. State our principles, not a wishy-washy laundry list of programs, but rather what we stand for. Sanders & Warren have done what nobody has done for years: Excite and attract voters, old and new. When, in 2 years when the mid-terms come up, the voters in the Eastern coal and rust belt states see that Donald Trump's grandiose plans have made their lives far worse, costing them jobs, pensions, Medicare & Obamacare safety nets, Democrats need to be ready with VIABLE alternatives.
And we need our own progressive "Tea Party" to get rid of our own stiffs in Congress and go after theirs.
Republicans have taken over the nation through hard, grinding work in the trenches, through billionaires funding state and local campaigns nobody usually cares about (think Art Pope in North Carolina), good voter turn-out, and, of course, the piece de resistance, blatant voter suppression techniques to deny and discourage Democratic turnout. It's worked. But in all that, the one thing they did NOT do was move to the center (ie, left). So why should Democrats move to the right?
The Democratic Party has tried that and EVERY TIME it has failed. Yet this is what a REPUBLICAN commentator suggests. And it's just plain wrong.
No, Democrats need to copy the Republican model. State our principles, not a wishy-washy laundry list of programs, but rather what we stand for. Sanders & Warren have done what nobody has done for years: Excite and attract voters, old and new. When, in 2 years when the mid-terms come up, the voters in the Eastern coal and rust belt states see that Donald Trump's grandiose plans have made their lives far worse, costing them jobs, pensions, Medicare & Obamacare safety nets, Democrats need to be ready with VIABLE alternatives.
And we need our own progressive "Tea Party" to get rid of our own stiffs in Congress and go after theirs.
14
The two major parties are in a race to figure something out.
What they have to figure out is:
1. More money does not necessarily lead to more votes. And if you don't believe me, just ask Jeb Bush or Hillary Clinton.
2. Whichever side actually delivers on substantial improvements to the living standards of working people would win in a landslide. Obama promised it, didn't deliver, and his party started losing. Trump promised it, and we'll see if he delivers but I'm guessing he won't.
But my suspicion is that just like Verizon and AT&T, they both have more to gain by abusing the general public than they do in vigorously competing against each other, so the current system of politicians selling out their voters will continue.
What they have to figure out is:
1. More money does not necessarily lead to more votes. And if you don't believe me, just ask Jeb Bush or Hillary Clinton.
2. Whichever side actually delivers on substantial improvements to the living standards of working people would win in a landslide. Obama promised it, didn't deliver, and his party started losing. Trump promised it, and we'll see if he delivers but I'm guessing he won't.
But my suspicion is that just like Verizon and AT&T, they both have more to gain by abusing the general public than they do in vigorously competing against each other, so the current system of politicians selling out their voters will continue.
20
The question implicitly raised here, but not asked, is what happens if the new administration doesn't deliver on his promises. Theoretically its party would suffer, as political parties have in the past, at the voting booth.
Does anybody think that's ever going to happen?
Does anybody think that's ever going to happen?
Dave should look at the facts: Hillary Clinton DID receive more votes than Donald Trump.
Obama has delivered but not as much as he could have if the Republicans wouldn't have obstructed his every step of the way. Party over country. It's unlikely to change.
What in the world is this column about? Democrats have already moved far to the right n my lifetime. The reason we lost this election is not because conservative principles swayed the electorate. It's because Trump won using old fashioned dog whistle politics appealing to the worst in people. We will not move in THAT shameful direction. Seriously, stop with the identity politics nonsense. Fighting for civil rights and gender equality is always the right thing to do. If it alienates certain white people then they need to look in the mirror and ask themselves why?
So Ross, you're saying that doing the right thing provokes push back from racist, sexist, xenophobes and we should appease them by moving in their direction and ceding our civil and basic human rights? Never.
So Ross, you're saying that doing the right thing provokes push back from racist, sexist, xenophobes and we should appease them by moving in their direction and ceding our civil and basic human rights? Never.
127
Ditto! Ditto, ditto, ditto! We are so far right, we're falling over, and we should move MORE that way?
I love this attitude as it guarantees that conservatives will be in power more oft than naught.
1
How old are you? In my lifetime there have been Dixiecrat filibustering every civil rights bill that was proposed. There have been politicians (Barack Obama, Hilary Clinton) who were against gay marriage and now support it. The list goes on and on.
The majority of people don't vote on identity politics and the very premise that they do assumes a unity of interest between women, black, gay, and latino voters. Not to mention assuming that within those groups all the members will vote the same way.
To quote a famous Democrat, "It's the economy stupid."
The majority of people don't vote on identity politics and the very premise that they do assumes a unity of interest between women, black, gay, and latino voters. Not to mention assuming that within those groups all the members will vote the same way.
To quote a famous Democrat, "It's the economy stupid."
1
The white rural voter is looking to government for help right now. The free market has failed them. They want an FDR, not a Reagan.
60
When reasonable people finally take back control of OUR governments the first thing they must do is tax ALL inheritance money and assets above
$5 million at 95% to prevent the greediest most socially unconscious people on the planet like The Con Don, the Koch brothers and Mitt Romney from using their inherited wealth and influence from destroying OUR democracy.
Democracy is not the problem - insatiable greed for money and power is.
$5 million at 95% to prevent the greediest most socially unconscious people on the planet like The Con Don, the Koch brothers and Mitt Romney from using their inherited wealth and influence from destroying OUR democracy.
Democracy is not the problem - insatiable greed for money and power is.
70
If the government taxed all inheritance at 95% for anything over 5 million, the rich would simply find ways around it with trusts, off-shore accounts, and the like. Very little revenue would be gained and it would be highly unpopular. Think of something else because that's a loser.
Please note - that Ross attributes the problem of worklessness in society to our welfare programs that incentivize our human tendency to sloth. So I'm guessing that he'd welcome your suggestion to tax the enormous wealth of the point one percent so that it does not impose a moral hazard on their children and their children's children ad infinitum. You're on board with that - right Ross?
1
So, your solution is to transfer the insatiable greed for money to the government? Not a chance.
"Can the Democrats move right?", you ask, Mr. Douthat? It's not "can they?", but "should they?".
The answer is an emphatic "NO".
You mention a few of the things on which the Democrats would need to compromise. The thing is, the Democrats have been compromising for decades. As well, the world has been moving progressively towards marriage equality, transgender rights, stronger gun controls, addressing human-caused climate change, women's rights and separation of Church & State.
In fact, on the latter, much of the world has been moving away from "Church" (i.e., religion), entirely. These are ideals of the Democratic Party - all opposed by the GOP.
Net-met. your suggestion that the Democratic Party be more like the party that has regressed even further with the election of Donald J. Trump, is, well... a regressive one.
The answer is an emphatic "NO".
You mention a few of the things on which the Democrats would need to compromise. The thing is, the Democrats have been compromising for decades. As well, the world has been moving progressively towards marriage equality, transgender rights, stronger gun controls, addressing human-caused climate change, women's rights and separation of Church & State.
In fact, on the latter, much of the world has been moving away from "Church" (i.e., religion), entirely. These are ideals of the Democratic Party - all opposed by the GOP.
Net-met. your suggestion that the Democratic Party be more like the party that has regressed even further with the election of Donald J. Trump, is, well... a regressive one.
37
The last thing the Democratic Party needs is advice from St. Ross about how to become more conservative. We don't need a "culture war truce", and we certainly can demand the Catholic charities and hospitals follow the law of the land. Funding and accreditation of conservative religious schools should be based on curriculum alone.
In general, there is no room for religion in politics.
In general, there is no room for religion in politics.
48
Hillary Clinton got more votes.
Democratic House candidates got more votes.
The United States is going to have an illegitimate President and illegitimate Congress. Anything and everything the illegitimate Congress and President conspire to do for four years will be illegitimate and against the people of the United States.
Democratic House candidates got more votes.
The United States is going to have an illegitimate President and illegitimate Congress. Anything and everything the illegitimate Congress and President conspire to do for four years will be illegitimate and against the people of the United States.
30
after the election it is clear that the democrats have only one issue to hang their hats on...they got the most votes...but the reality is that both parties play under the same rules, the most electoral college vote wins...i live in new york and spent some time in florida before the election...trump made absolutely no effort to win new york, there were almost no tv ads or campaign stops...in florida the airwaves were overloaded with presidential ads because the state was in play...if the election was based on popular vote only trump would have gone after new york and california and other democratic states instead of conceding them and rightfully using his resources in states like wisconsin and michigan...the smugness of the democratic political machine allowed a man like trump, who may be the least qualified president ever, to win the election...and to gloss over the fact that the senate, the house, state governorships, and state legislatures are now all controlled by republicans and the only answer that democrats have is to point to the popular vote..if the democrats don't open their eyes and see that their policies and arrogance towards people who don't agree with them have turned the majority of the country into republican strongholds, not because the population particularly agrees with the republicans but because, like hillary clinton, they find their arrogance and condescending attitude repugnant
Both parties have been moving to the right for 30 years. The fact that the Democrats have moved so far to the right is one reason they lost this election in my opinion (I dont think Bernie would've lost to Trump).
33
I fully agree. Had it been Bernie v. Don, it would've been "good versus evil" and Bernie would've won. Instead, we got "bad versus worse" and ended up electing an unscrupulous demagogue. What a pity.
1
There is alt-right, hard right, merely right, and lite right; there is the democratic party establishment which has no discernible orientation other than money and arrogance; finally there is the Sanders left. Pray tell where is the center right and how are the democrats to know which direction to move to find it? Had the democrats campaigned as good Eisenhower Republicans, the outcome might well have been different.
No tweaking. This moment will either bring forth a realignment or something more revolutionary.
No tweaking. This moment will either bring forth a realignment or something more revolutionary.
5
-
Rule #1 in politics, never take political advice from the opposition
Rule #1 in politics, never take political advice from the opposition
46
Yet Trump took all those rules of politics and threw them out the door. The result...the Electoral College and the presidency.
1
Democrats are doing so badly with their center-left positions that their candidate received 2.3 million more votes than the Republican candidate and they gained seats in both the Senate and House. The position that seems to have defeated them in the key midwestern states that took the election was perceived to be to their left. Clearly the answer must be to move to the right!
13
Good point...so when is Hillary's inauguration? It doesn't matter if she got more votes. Everyone knew the rules of the game in advance and she tragically lost. Pointing to more votes is both useless and cold comfort for the millions who will suffer under a Trump presidency.
Blah, blah, blah....always the same refrain from Church people and Republicans: you Democrats have to compromise on everything so we can get everything we want. Hold your ground, democrats. The only reason trump won this election was because of fear-mongering, lies and a promise to bring back jobs. When those big three blue states aren't humming again with thousands of manufacturing jobs of old, and their health care, and schools, and veteran care, and other social safety-net programs are gutted, they'll be falling over each other vote blue again. Vile propaganda won this election.
56
Exactly
Please, not "church people." Most church people aren't nuts, any more than most synagogue people or most mosque people.
1
They might be falling all over themselves to vote red if the propaganda machine does its job. Then again, who knows if any of us will ever again be able to vote for anything?
Don't listen to Douthat. It wasn't that Democrats haven't become right-wing enough that cost them the Electoral College vote, it's was that a lot of people want change after 8 years of any party holding the presidency.
The Republicans now have to deliver all the nonsense that they have hyperventilated over to drum up support and the two thirds of Americans who don't agree but fail to show at the polls are probably not going to like it.
The Republicans now have to deliver all the nonsense that they have hyperventilated over to drum up support and the two thirds of Americans who don't agree but fail to show at the polls are probably not going to like it.
13
Was this not the Clinton agenda?
10
Paul Ryan plans to dismantle Medicare, his Holy Grail, next year and will have the votes to pass it and a president dumb enough to sign it into law. Watch the Democrats run on this atrocity in 2018. Worry about your own party's zeal to dismantle every social program since FDR and see how that turns out for it.
30
The country has moved so far to the right, that if we look to the left we will see Ghengis Khan. How much farther right do the Democrats have to move?
Ross talks about social issues, asking the Democrats to back away from regulating issues dear to religious conservatives. Presumably, we are left to be OK with hospitals and adoption agencies that will not recognize the rights of a married couple, if they are the same sex. But you'll notice no plea to have conservatives stop inserting their religion - Douthat's definition of pluralism is to stop ganging up on conservative Christians inserting religion into law.
And liberal identity politics must go - but leave the identity politics of the right alone. You know what they are: conservative Christians, rural "Flyover" versus the "liberal elite," and at the worst end of the spectrum, white supremecists,
And punt the communitarian philosophy of liberalism. Substitute the sense of social justice one takes from the Sermon on the Mount, with the philosophy of the Ant and the Grasshopper. Never mind that we have done much of that with social welfare programs already.
Ross, if your view of the Democratic party were correct, why bother? Let's try something different. Why don't Republicans stop acting like fascist, and get their own party back on track?
Ross talks about social issues, asking the Democrats to back away from regulating issues dear to religious conservatives. Presumably, we are left to be OK with hospitals and adoption agencies that will not recognize the rights of a married couple, if they are the same sex. But you'll notice no plea to have conservatives stop inserting their religion - Douthat's definition of pluralism is to stop ganging up on conservative Christians inserting religion into law.
And liberal identity politics must go - but leave the identity politics of the right alone. You know what they are: conservative Christians, rural "Flyover" versus the "liberal elite," and at the worst end of the spectrum, white supremecists,
And punt the communitarian philosophy of liberalism. Substitute the sense of social justice one takes from the Sermon on the Mount, with the philosophy of the Ant and the Grasshopper. Never mind that we have done much of that with social welfare programs already.
Ross, if your view of the Democratic party were correct, why bother? Let's try something different. Why don't Republicans stop acting like fascist, and get their own party back on track?
39
To paraphrase Obama, "They won."
So as certain segments of our society continue both our slide to the right and slide in most social metric vis a vis our first world cousins, Mr. Douthat thinks the Dems should join the Republicans in becoming more extremist.
"The Taliban won by a slight margin so we should all move towards Islamic extremism."
The "center" is to the left of Obama which would out us right in the middle of most FIRST WORLD CONSERVATIVES. The Democrats moving to the right would be moving from the Center-right to the hard-right.
Democrats need to keep their eyes on the ball. All demographics are moving towards the Democrats. Trump will accelerate this.
If you give Mr. Douthat any credibility you need to learn to live with that. I do not.
"The Taliban won by a slight margin so we should all move towards Islamic extremism."
The "center" is to the left of Obama which would out us right in the middle of most FIRST WORLD CONSERVATIVES. The Democrats moving to the right would be moving from the Center-right to the hard-right.
Democrats need to keep their eyes on the ball. All demographics are moving towards the Democrats. Trump will accelerate this.
If you give Mr. Douthat any credibility you need to learn to live with that. I do not.
11
Douthat is about 20 years behind the times. Democrats moving right was Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Gerhard Schörder, Françcois Hollande. Been there, done that. "Identity politics" -- compromising on that means going back to heteronormative discrimination, to uncontrolled knee-jerk policing ... what's to compromise, when we are still decades away from the equality this country stands for? And a guaranteed minimum income *is coming*, as the logical consequence of current and future productivity, unless you prefer the alternative that's taking shape under the groper's future administration -- slums, ignorance, illness, riots. Bringing poverty back home.
13
I agree with you. But, alas, how many more seats and elections will the D lose before there is an awakening? Pelosi needs to go. Mr. Sanders would not have won. Hang with me here in western NC and I'll show you how most folks think, and then vote. The D party is done, as constituted now. One final note, the D senator from NY should not be the minority leader. Part of the bookend problem, Pelosi in the west and Schumer in the east. Good luck with that.
6
Oh goody - We are now directed to think as "most folks think" in the Tar Heel State. Things are more complicated than this smug prescription implies. Some of us have different values. This was an election and as far as it goes, this is still a democracy.
1
The Constitution of the United States of America opens with "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union...promote the general welfare...." The current crop of Republicans has no understanding of how to do this. The Democrats before Clinton did. So, no, Democratic Party don't go more right. Instead, look back to the successes of the New Deal - yes, the New Deal!
1
Seriously, where could we move? We're already what would have been called "far right" fifty years ago.
Why in the world should Democrats move rightward. That is what Bill Clinton did and the Democratic Party became just slightly less rightwing party than the Republicans . The Republicans are so far to the right that it is not recognizable as a reasonable conservative party. Trump will absolutely destroy what remains of the GOP. Democrats need to stand on principal and they need to do a better job of educating the public. They need to spend time in the trenches and foster grass roots participation in the democratic process. School boards, local legislators, small town politics etc.
17
if the Democrats want to educate people, they need to stop telling people that they are morons and stupid and "acting against their own interests" if they don't agree with the Democrat agenda. The Democratic party has suffered from its own arrogance and condescension. Many Democrats are genuinely surprised when the people they despise don't love them or agree with them. When the Democrats quit pretending to be concerned about the working people of the world and actually listen to their concerns, then maybe they will make some progress. Additionally, the Democrats, with their capitulation to identity politics, shouldn't be surprised when working class whites do the same thing for the other party. They poisoned that particular well.
2
Congratulations! You have captured the essence of the Democrats' problem. Your first commenter is in denial and an example of why Trump won.
7
Brexit, Donald Trump and Francois Fillon have just combined to show that immigration is the single biggest issue throughout the West. Elites who refuse to listen to the people's desire to preserve their natal cultures will be swept aside.
7
We certainly did a great job in preserving the "natal culture" of the American Indian when we invaded this country and destroyed most of its original inhabitants.
We Democrats moved too far to the right and center. Hilary Clinton is eminently qualified, but is beholden to the same big finance as any Republican. A true Social Labor party would trounce the mess that is the Republican party today.
5
The first definition of compromise in five dictionaries I checked, including Merriam's and the OED, cite MUTUAL concessions in a dispute or argument. The second definition refers to the EXPEDIENT acceptance of standards lower than those desired. The first definition is the democratic idea unrecognized in the last decade (or more) by Republicans. The second definition is the Republican requirement of Democrats.
Ross, speak to us about moving to the right when you and your party move to the left.
Ross, speak to us about moving to the right when you and your party move to the left.
8
"Be more like Trump," is that the idea?
The Democratic Party has been moving right my entire lifetime, and it's been losing power my entire lifetime.
Now the advice is that we have to move right again. Just a little. Sigh.
The Democratic Party has been moving right my entire lifetime, and it's been losing power my entire lifetime.
Now the advice is that we have to move right again. Just a little. Sigh.
8
'That kind of movement is often part of how political parties recover from debilitation and defeat' - I stopped reading when I got to this and he didn't mention the popular vote.
Actually, I flipped down and stumbled on "spike in lawlessness" [eye-roll] ...
Actually, I flipped down and stumbled on "spike in lawlessness" [eye-roll] ...
6
We have already experienced the Rockerfeller Republicans in Democratic garb. It was the Left wing of the Democrats that gave the party a wake-up shake before the T Train ran over them. Ross, thank you for your concern, but the Republicans need to collect themselves because their cause is at stake as well. The right-wing populists are the engineers on their train, and it may be headed towards a bridge that is out. Pax, jb.
3
Moving to the right would be a bad idea for The Democrats. Younger voters are more open-minded and accepting of the changes going on in our country. I am an aging boomer, and sadly, so many folks my age want to go back to the good old days.
We need a viable alternative to the right wing extremism in this country. Change is coming. America wanted one last taste of moving the country backward before the younger generation takes over.
Move forward, not backward. We lost in the electoral college because a lot of younger voters could not connect with Mrs. Clinton and apparently did not think she was qualified for the presidency. I disagreed with them, but the results are in and it is time to turn the page on the past and look forward to the future.
We need a viable alternative to the right wing extremism in this country. Change is coming. America wanted one last taste of moving the country backward before the younger generation takes over.
Move forward, not backward. We lost in the electoral college because a lot of younger voters could not connect with Mrs. Clinton and apparently did not think she was qualified for the presidency. I disagreed with them, but the results are in and it is time to turn the page on the past and look forward to the future.
3
No. The Democrats should not move towards becoming a more "Republican light" party. They need to reconnect liberalism with the working class, and emphasize the economic uncertainty that exists in the world and the need for collective action. Americans are generous, and they understand teamwork, they understand the value of someone "having their back". They need to get out of bed with the corporate interests and back into a real dialogue with working people in all walks of life.
11
Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by more than two million votes. More people typically vote for Democrats for Congress. But Republicans prevail because of gerrymandered districts and voter suppression. In other words, the game is rigged. In addition, Hillary had to contend with white nationalism, Comey's October non-surprise, third-party purists, fake news that reinforced decades of lies, and the media's false equivalency of her. I fail to see how caving in to right-wing bullying would have overcome those obstacles.
19
All of that is true, as is the fact that holding the Presidency three terms in a row is very hard, and current circumstances make it harder. And HRC was a wonky low-inspiration candidate with some very unfortunate baggage. Buckraking Wall Street was always guaranteed to be a political liability. No way around running with Bill & Monica in the background music.
To be frank about it -- elections do have consequences. The American electorate wanted to burn it down, and they put a burn-it-down-clown into office. And now we'll see how far Trump can burn it down.
the Democrats can't be "the we want to burn it down less" party. The Democrats can't be the "Republicans say 1+1 = 3, we'll be the 1+1 = 2.5 party."
To be frank about it -- elections do have consequences. The American electorate wanted to burn it down, and they put a burn-it-down-clown into office. And now we'll see how far Trump can burn it down.
the Democrats can't be "the we want to burn it down less" party. The Democrats can't be the "Republicans say 1+1 = 3, we'll be the 1+1 = 2.5 party."
This is becoming a far too often used excuse from members of the left "If we lost, then it is because the game is rigged against us." Unfortunately, gerrymandering is just politics and practiced by whichever party is in power, mainly at the city and state level. In Texas, which the left loves to use as an example of Republican gerrymandering, when Anne Richards (a great Democrat Governor) was in power, there was plenty of gerrymandering going around for the liberals. It was undone when Bush took over in Austin. I am a conservative, but, look at the person running and the platform run on. Using this, I have voted for Dems (as well as independents) on a good number of occasions. A lot of Texans vote this way as well. Texas has recently been solid red, but with the uncertainty of a Trump presidency, was more a light purple this year. I believe the state might have switched to blue had anyone but HRC, or Bernie on socialist agenda, ran against Ms Clinton. Members of all parties here are fed up with the status quo of both parties recently. To most Texans, what a candidate stands for and what they will do for their constituency, is more important than party, race or gender. This statement is proven by the results of elections since the 1960's.
1
Mr. Douthat, a Republican, wants to help the Democrats like a coyote wants to help a roadrunner.
14
So you believe the Democrats should be willing for bipartisanship even after watching the Republicans hold Pres Obama and the citizens business hostage the eight years he was president. I have a message to Mr Schumer. We need to work with our adversaries to obtain as much as we can for the values of our platform. However, in no way should he try to normalize Trump or his band of sycophants.
13
I got hung, drawn and quartered in a previous comment thread for suggesting that a policy of obstruction by the Democrats would happen if the shoe was on the other foot. Unbelievable.
1
Sorry Russ. Not buyin' what you're sellin'. The democratic party has, up until this election, been dragged farther and farther to the right. It's why everyone thinks that there's only one party in DC. The unabashed liberalism of Bernie Sanders breathed new life and hope into the party and the platform. You talk about this election like it was some crushing defeat. I would remind you that we gained 6 seats in the house (despite the rampant gerrymandering by the GOP) and 2 in the senate. Not to mention a 2.5 million vote lead in the popular vote for president. No sir, we don't need to move right. The GOP needs to move left. We'll talk again after the mid-terms and 2020. Because this republican victory is going to be short-lived.
8
The right did not take the fresh breathe out of the Sanders campaign. One must look no farther than mainstream media, highlighted by the NYT, and the Clinton campaign working with the DNC for that. As a conservative, even I was appalled to see what happened to Senator Sanders. I did not agree with some of what he said but I am a solid supporter in a kind of fair election to give the voters the right to decide. I am also disappointed in our parties nominee but he legally won the nomination.
1
Why Ross, so we can have a conservative party and a fascist party? Next thing you know it's the 50s again....the 1850s.
9
No. It's not that complicated. We lost because a Spoiler split the party. Another Nader.
2
No. We don't need to move rightward and if anything the next 4 years will reward a leftish stance. Just to review, the Dems lost because of Trump's many lies and demogogery, Comey's thumb on the election scale, an antiquated electoral college, HRC won more votes in the wrong places, Trump voters ushered in a new word--post-truth, the GOP has spent the last 10 years avoiding doing anything on immigration causing the problem and was then rewarded for it. I could go on but the GOP Ideas are antithetical to the constitution. How's that SCOTUS nomination going? See my point?? Re: Ferguson, why don't you talk about how the police force was being used as a revenue generator? It was in the AG's report. Wasn't there a consent decree? Bernie Sanders moved left and nearly won the nomination and at the time was polling ahead of HRC vs. Trump. Dems are in disarray but to revamp would be to take themselves out to a further place in the wilderness. The play now is to resist Trump's more egregious proposals and cooperate when it makes sense.
7
We've tried identity politics; it's a stone cold loser. It's time for the sensible pocketbook politics that animated FDR and Truman's political dominance for a generation. Here's four ideas that will make a substantive difference and send the right political message to the blue collar Democrats in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and elsewhere who handed the election to Donald Trump:
1. Close the loss carry forward deduction from income that gave Mr. Trump $916 million in undeserved tax breaks according to the New York Times. To that add as many as you can from the attached list of special tax breaks for the wealthy put out by the IRS: https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/tax-policy/Documents/Tax-Expend.... Assign the savings from those repealed tax breaks to reducing Federal income taxes on families making less than $60,000 a year.
2. Tax capital gains at the same rate as is ordinary income, and assign the tax savings to tax cuts orrebate checks for families making less than $60,000 per year.
3. Adopt one or more of the tax policies designed to help low- and middle-income families proposed by the Brooking Institution (see: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2015/04/15/tax-policies-to-suppo.... I like giving substantial tax breaks to secondary workers in low-income households since this group (largely women) now takes home only about 50% of what they earn.
4. Fund a $5 trillion infrastructure program heavy on blue-collar jobs.
This is the GOP's Achilles heel.
1. Close the loss carry forward deduction from income that gave Mr. Trump $916 million in undeserved tax breaks according to the New York Times. To that add as many as you can from the attached list of special tax breaks for the wealthy put out by the IRS: https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/tax-policy/Documents/Tax-Expend.... Assign the savings from those repealed tax breaks to reducing Federal income taxes on families making less than $60,000 a year.
2. Tax capital gains at the same rate as is ordinary income, and assign the tax savings to tax cuts orrebate checks for families making less than $60,000 per year.
3. Adopt one or more of the tax policies designed to help low- and middle-income families proposed by the Brooking Institution (see: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2015/04/15/tax-policies-to-suppo.... I like giving substantial tax breaks to secondary workers in low-income households since this group (largely women) now takes home only about 50% of what they earn.
4. Fund a $5 trillion infrastructure program heavy on blue-collar jobs.
This is the GOP's Achilles heel.
11
You apparently don't know who the country just elected.
All this analysis about the democrats need to move this way and that way. there was nothing wrong with the dems platform the election was stolen from Hilary by Comie. If he had not made that announcement Hilary would have had it in the bag. But noooooo you guys want to report on fluff and feel good stories. I listen to the alt right and i know why people are drawn to them, they call a spade a spade with some deception of course. you continue barking up the fluff tree and you too will lose readership. NY times i emplore you to stop being the CNN of print media, go out and do your research. Do hard hitting investigative journalism or find yourself in the dust pile of history.
2
Comey was NOT the cause of this epic election loss by HRC. Please face the facts. HRC couldn't get the lackadaisical voters pumped up, she didn't even TRY to appeal to the Rust Belt, she lost the youngsters, she flipped on issues that mattered, identity politics ... on and on and on. No, it wasn't HER time. The Democrats better learn from this or they face a long time foraging in the political wilderness.
1
Nothing went wrong for liberalism on election day -- Hillary Clinton earned the plurality of the vote. In fact, the Democrats have won the plurality in six of the past seven national elections, which is the most wins in seven elections for any party since the Civil War.
The question is, what went wrong for democracy on election day; what went wrong for America.
The question is, what went wrong for democracy on election day; what went wrong for America.
6
As a Democrat, I do think some reforms are necessary. But the next four years will probably show us extreme Republican overreach with an inevitable backlash that will make the reforms difficult.
1
Hello brother Ross. Is anyone in there?
Listen up. More people voted for Hillary than the president elect.
If only the millennial's voted the country would be blue from sea to shining sea.
Yours is a dying breed of movement conservatism that is only in power for a short time due to the vagaries of the electoral collage, voter suppression, and lies.
Don't even think we are going to move right. Your people and party are going to have to move left. Right along side the rest of the country.
Listen up. More people voted for Hillary than the president elect.
If only the millennial's voted the country would be blue from sea to shining sea.
Yours is a dying breed of movement conservatism that is only in power for a short time due to the vagaries of the electoral collage, voter suppression, and lies.
Don't even think we are going to move right. Your people and party are going to have to move left. Right along side the rest of the country.
13
The Electoral College is there to protect all of the country's voice. Do you really believe it is fair to have condensed states and cities dictate policy for all other Americans? How does the left and right coasts know what policies and agenda are best for so called "flyover" states? A good example is the lefts view on illegal immigration (Note: Illegal is different than legal.) Come and live in a border state for a bit. If you are an American citizen that does not speak Spanish, you will wonder what country you are living in at times. It is not unusual to walk into a small store and ask if anybody speaks English to assist you. In government buildings it is difficult to find signs that are not written in Spanish. One is lucky if the front desk help speaks English. It is almost as the government believes that American citizens are not worthy of assistance. Stand in line at a grocery store and see non English speakers use their Lone Star card (food stamps) to purchase $252 worth of brisket when you are using the last bit of your tax reduced paycheck to buy macaroni and cheese for your family to eat. Then on the way home an illegal alien with no drivers license and no insurance runs a red light taking out your vehicle that you can only afford liability insurance on. The illegal immigrant is then given a ticket for not having insurance but not held to account for being in this country illegally. Welcome to your open borders nirvana.
1
If winning elections is the ultimate objective and ideas are just products that need to be fine tuned to achieve that (in the same way as Apple's ultimate objective it to earn money, and Iphones are just the product), then this column is point on. But if you have the weakness to believe that ideas are what counts, and winning an election is just a way to apply these ideas, then this is pathetic. Of course there is the Trump way, which is to make you sign for an Iphone and effectively give you an old 1990 Nokia.
If Democrats from SF, LA, Seattle and NYC keep telling 50% of the country they are intolerant racists because they are not totally on board with identity politics and the narrow agendas of certain very left interest groups, then Trump's four years will most certainly be eight years. The traditional Pelosi message is not resonating. Time to change course.
PS--I am a Democrat.
PS--I am a Democrat.
7
Michael says "PS_I am a Democrat". Your rhetoric suggests you have the wrong tense: you WERE a Democrat. You are a Dixiecrat.
1
I thought that Clinton had the more thoughtful campaign and approach to things. Trump and the GOP have relied upon cheap shots, the usual round of half truths about tax cuts, government interference, and elitism to goad unhappy citizens into voting against their own interests. Nothing I've heard in this campaign on the GOP side is new or helpful to the working and middle classes. That means that nothing the GOP is planning will truly help most of us. If you want to criticize the Democrats there are plenty of other things that need changing. The biggest was counting on Clinton rather than grooming at least one or two others to run in the primaries. The GOP had no good candidates. Even Trump doesn't have the qualifications and experience Clinton has or, worse, that Ted Cruz has. At least Cruz has served in government. Trump has served his own interests.
We'll see how people feel after the midterm elections when Trump will have been in office for 2 years. Will his policies and the policies of a GOP controlled Congress be helping to make America great again or just assisting the rich in amassing more wealth at our expense? Will America work for all her citizens or only the elitists (in this case those who are at the very top of the income ladder0? Given the statements Trump has made and what the GOP wants, I doubt it. What the Democrats need to do is point out, with emphasis, every action the GOP makes to hurt the majority of Americans.
We'll see how people feel after the midterm elections when Trump will have been in office for 2 years. Will his policies and the policies of a GOP controlled Congress be helping to make America great again or just assisting the rich in amassing more wealth at our expense? Will America work for all her citizens or only the elitists (in this case those who are at the very top of the income ladder0? Given the statements Trump has made and what the GOP wants, I doubt it. What the Democrats need to do is point out, with emphasis, every action the GOP makes to hurt the majority of Americans.
1
Earth to Ross: Anyone paying attention during the primary and general election would know that moving the Democratic Party further to the right would relegate it to the political graveyard, along with the Whigs et al. Of course, that’s what you’d prefer anyway. There is a reason, Ross, why Bernie Sanders filled dozens of venues with tens of thousands of enthusiastic supporters during the Dem primary. It wasn’t because they wanted him to move right of center of the mainstream Democratic Party. But you and other pundits are hell-bent on ignoring this inconvenient bit of history. After all, your owners - corporate America (by the way, also the owners of this government) - don't want to see reporting on America's progressive base. It might cause more Americans to think that way. And it could mean the death of establishment politics for both parties.
7
"Moral and religious pluralism" is not what got Mr. Trump elected. It was just the opposite - a hunkering down amidst an avalanche of verbal abuse and ridicule aimed at many of the most vulnerable in our land. I would hate to see the Democratic Party lean in that direction.
9
This is conventional wisdom cubed. Why have two political parties at all?
1
A Trump apologist offering advice to the Democrats is the equivalent of a doctor offering hemlock. Trust me, it doesn't taste so bad, try it.
Good satire, RD.
Good satire, RD.
7
The Democrats cannot correct the profound wrongs of the GOP by becoming more wrong themselves. They only need to keep the faith, and be patient.
Mr. Douthat is justifiably frightened about what the electorate (and for that matter, the rest of the world) will think of Republicans in four years' time.
Mr. Douthat is justifiably frightened about what the electorate (and for that matter, the rest of the world) will think of Republicans in four years' time.
7
The photo of Trump , Preibus and Romney sharing a $500 meal at Jean George's says it all. Let them eat cake " is the message to us , the lumpen proletariat , who will stand by helplessly as Ryan guts our health care and Social Security.
Is this the moving right that you call for?
Is this the moving right that you call for?
9
Yes and all Democrats could become Republicans. Except, speaking only for myself, prefer my liberal ideas. How about, as the compromise you apparently want, Republicans move left.
8
Wait, didn't the Democrats win the popular vote by about 2%?
The country didn't move right, Mr. Douthat.
The country didn't move right, Mr. Douthat.
10
In a contest between a Republican and a Republican, a Republican will win every time - Harry Truman
3
Obviously, this is what Douthat would like to see. But frankly, the so-called "social-cultural issue" (which liberals see as issues of civil liberty) would be less hyped if working class swing voters felt better about the economy. The Dems didn't alienate too many voters by being to liberal on social issues, but by being technocratic on economics ones. Most people, if they do not feel economically threatened, are willing to live and let live. And most people, unlike Douthat, do not have an axe to grind regarding sex and reproduction.
5
I presume that in 1933 Germany this columnist would be (mildly) suggesting that Social Democrats should become more tolerant of the opposition's anti-Semtism, gun-wielding mobs, direct assault on truth by racist propagandists and so forth. And the Right's leader couldn't possibly be "all that bad," because the burden of governing would mature him.
I prefer Bertold Brecht as a writer and observer to Douthat, and I hope readers forgive me for daring to use Brecht's name in such a revolting comparison.
I prefer Bertold Brecht as a writer and observer to Douthat, and I hope readers forgive me for daring to use Brecht's name in such a revolting comparison.
7
I'm afraid that sadly, they probably won't. The Obama-era party (during which Hillary ran) is comprised of progressives so steeped in the moralistic rhetoric of left-wing academia that any compromise is akin to "selling out," "white supremacy," "heteronormativity," "Islamophobia," etc. The entire worldview of the progressive wing is based on Post-Colonialism and Gender Studies.
3
Bravo!
1
Sure they can, but not in three microseconds.
For now, the Democratic caucus is chock-full of bomb-throwers; but nothing is forever. Soon, the dawn will break on a weary Senate without Harry Reid, and that could never be a bad thing. He’s done more to damage Dems than anyone alive, except for Nancy Pelosi – his fault, despite warnings, that Dems no longer are able to employ the filibuster to influence Republican presidential nominations. True, Pelosi herself is re-animated as House minority leader, although she has some competition this time.
But we Republicans will loyally support Pelosi, because she’s presided over four serial Democratic House electoral disasters. Did you folks know that Republicans polled three MILLION more House votes than Democrats in 2016? Yes, I know, the Times didn’t made a thing of it – you had to go to the WSJ to find this out. And it continues to bleed into the states: 33 Republican governorships, undivided Republican legislatures in 32 of our states, just about everyone down to dog-catcher a Republican. And, of course, undivided Republican national governance.
Then, Liz Warren is buried so deep in the political graveyard that to dig her up would cause the Chinese to scream about territorial infringement. And we’re not hearing a lot from Bernie these days, either.
Sooner or later Dem voters will twig: being so left gets them bragging rights but absolutely nothing else. THAT’S when they’ll tack starboard. And America will be a much better place.
For now, the Democratic caucus is chock-full of bomb-throwers; but nothing is forever. Soon, the dawn will break on a weary Senate without Harry Reid, and that could never be a bad thing. He’s done more to damage Dems than anyone alive, except for Nancy Pelosi – his fault, despite warnings, that Dems no longer are able to employ the filibuster to influence Republican presidential nominations. True, Pelosi herself is re-animated as House minority leader, although she has some competition this time.
But we Republicans will loyally support Pelosi, because she’s presided over four serial Democratic House electoral disasters. Did you folks know that Republicans polled three MILLION more House votes than Democrats in 2016? Yes, I know, the Times didn’t made a thing of it – you had to go to the WSJ to find this out. And it continues to bleed into the states: 33 Republican governorships, undivided Republican legislatures in 32 of our states, just about everyone down to dog-catcher a Republican. And, of course, undivided Republican national governance.
Then, Liz Warren is buried so deep in the political graveyard that to dig her up would cause the Chinese to scream about territorial infringement. And we’re not hearing a lot from Bernie these days, either.
Sooner or later Dem voters will twig: being so left gets them bragging rights but absolutely nothing else. THAT’S when they’ll tack starboard. And America will be a much better place.
10
The fact that Republicans received 3 million more House votes than Democrats is as meaningful as Clinton's popular vote victory of over 2.3 million (and counting).
Most of the House seats are gerrymandered. Even so, the Democrats gained 6 seats in the House.
The next 4 years are going to be terrible for our nation as we are being led by a petulant child who will do tremendous damage to the very same people that gave him the victory.
Most of the House seats are gerrymandered. Even so, the Democrats gained 6 seats in the House.
The next 4 years are going to be terrible for our nation as we are being led by a petulant child who will do tremendous damage to the very same people that gave him the victory.
14
No, Kevin, the performance of Republicans in the House elections is MUCH more relevant than Mrs. Clinton's win of the popular presidential vote. Or hadn't you noticed who runs the House these days?
And keep blaming "gerrymandering" for the slaughter. It will keep you from mounting an effective counter-effort, such as more compelling messages, that could change the electoral reality.
The next four years will be fine, except for the stomach-linings of liberals.
And keep blaming "gerrymandering" for the slaughter. It will keep you from mounting an effective counter-effort, such as more compelling messages, that could change the electoral reality.
The next four years will be fine, except for the stomach-linings of liberals.
3
Yes Richard darling, but the Dems won the votes.
Considering the fact that Trump's win was aided in every swing state by third party votes who disliked both candidates, which was in part due to the media that loved false equivalency and an FBI director who unfairly tipped the scales during the election (there were 75k write-is in Florida for goodness sake), and the fact that millions of voters did not vote for the grotesque ultra conservative/racist government that seems to be coalescing before our eyes (Trump promised to drain the swamp not fill his cabinet with swamp dwellers), and they sure didn't vote for gutting their social safety net, he promised to protect medicare and social security, and finally yes, we are the majority but are out of power, especially in the Senate, because we happen to like living in cosmopolitan areas, I think the last thing Democrats need to do is shift rightward. The Republicans are dunk with power and think they can do anything they want with zero opposition. They are crazy. Their plans to gut healthcare reforms will create chaos. Trump will not bring back the jobs that he promised and his cabinet picks from DOJ to Education to DHS and beyond, will push policies concerning civil rights, gay rights, women's rights etc. that will create such a backlash that we will be on fire. What the Democrats need is a backbone. They need to stand firm for the values and principles that we, the majority, hold dear while the Republicans hang themselves by finally showing America what party they really are.
6
Ross, Your analysis goes wrong the moment you propose that Democrats lost by being too far left. Trump won by mounting a campaign that ruthlessly ignored traditional left-right labels. From the Left he pulled his emphasis on protectionism in trade. From the Right he pulled his anti-immigration theme. From the Left he drew his proposal for a massive investment in infrastructure. From the Right came his embrace of low taxes.
What really characterizes Trumpism is white populism, which borders on white nationalism. He feeds on the anger and anxiety of a white working class that sees itself in decline relative to the growing visibility and influence of minorities.
It is Reaganism without Reagan's charm or innate optimism.
Trump will fail to correct the white decline, and Democrats will eventually profit from that failure. But the Democrats' strategy going forward cannot be to try to appeal to the same inward-looking white angst. They cannot out-Trump Trump. Instead, Democrats need to embrace an openness to the world. Where Trump believes Americans are basically losers, Democrats need to show how we can be winners by putting education, training, and investment first. Leave inwardness and fear to the Republicans.
What really characterizes Trumpism is white populism, which borders on white nationalism. He feeds on the anger and anxiety of a white working class that sees itself in decline relative to the growing visibility and influence of minorities.
It is Reaganism without Reagan's charm or innate optimism.
Trump will fail to correct the white decline, and Democrats will eventually profit from that failure. But the Democrats' strategy going forward cannot be to try to appeal to the same inward-looking white angst. They cannot out-Trump Trump. Instead, Democrats need to embrace an openness to the world. Where Trump believes Americans are basically losers, Democrats need to show how we can be winners by putting education, training, and investment first. Leave inwardness and fear to the Republicans.
12
Now that the debris has finally settled over the post election Democratic blues it's time to take stock and rebuild. For starters it's highly unlikely that the Democrats will take a rightward turn especially with the alt left in the Senate represented by Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren getting leadership roles. The only hope the Democrats have is to rally around the only influential leader they have, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, for the time being. In Congress Nancy Pelosi has just got to go. It's time to stop rewarding failure. What's also hurting Democrats is that they're now perceived the party of clueless cocktail party elitists. Look at the electoral map--only the Far West and the Northeast still remain steadfastly blue. The rest of the map which the Democrats disdainfully refer to as "flyover country" is as red as it ever was. That is why the Democrats fail--they just refuse to understand how and why Middle America rejects their positive progressive revolutionary agenda in favor of this bombastic billionaire whose childish goal is "To Make America Great Again." Seriously???
4
I happen to live in a flyover state that is becoming more blue rather than less. What makes it different from most of the flyover states that are turning redder? It's simple: it has an economy that is doing very well at attracting younger, more educated people--just like the West Coast and Northeastern states. It has good schools, a thriving cultural scene, great public amenities, and a dynamism that is almost completely missing from the states that are becoming redder. The reality is that Democrats don't disdain those other states; they disdain the attitudes that keep those economically losing states down.
One of my children lives in Wisconsin where almost everyone she meets grew up in Wisconsin. She's a rare bird who voluntarily moved there, albeit to its most liberal (and vibrant) city. The sad thing is that for many younger people in those states, the only option is to move elsewhere if they want to take advantage of economic growth. And that's not the fault of the Democrats; it's the fault of their Republican governments which are busily doing things like dismantling the once first class public universities that were the pride of the state.
One of my children lives in Wisconsin where almost everyone she meets grew up in Wisconsin. She's a rare bird who voluntarily moved there, albeit to its most liberal (and vibrant) city. The sad thing is that for many younger people in those states, the only option is to move elsewhere if they want to take advantage of economic growth. And that's not the fault of the Democrats; it's the fault of their Republican governments which are busily doing things like dismantling the once first class public universities that were the pride of the state.
3
I'm not sure how the Democratic debate will go, but the success of Bernie Sanders, especially among independents, suggests considerable scope for moving left. I was always a Clinton supporter, but saw clearly that her past center-right history was one of the main factors working against her.
Meanwhile Trump won by in part coopting an economic populism more usually associated with the left, and making magical promises such as giving everyone free healthcare while abolishing Obamacare. Whatever that is, it's not exactly a move rightward.
We'll see.
Meanwhile Trump won by in part coopting an economic populism more usually associated with the left, and making magical promises such as giving everyone free healthcare while abolishing Obamacare. Whatever that is, it's not exactly a move rightward.
We'll see.
11
Witnessing the post-Trump rise in hate crime points to how a win emboldens folks to start dishing out all the rubbish they've held in for so long. Ross is no exception.
In our current post-fact world it does not matter that I have neither the time nor the space to address his ramblings one-by-one. The purported fact that Democrats are loosing on the State and Local levels conveniently ignores years of GOP-lead Gerrymandering. The electoral college is just the same, but at the Federal level.
The GOP would do itself a service by understanding that winning an office at the cost of a popular vote loss is a disaster in the making. As Dr. King said "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice"
In our current post-fact world it does not matter that I have neither the time nor the space to address his ramblings one-by-one. The purported fact that Democrats are loosing on the State and Local levels conveniently ignores years of GOP-lead Gerrymandering. The electoral college is just the same, but at the Federal level.
The GOP would do itself a service by understanding that winning an office at the cost of a popular vote loss is a disaster in the making. As Dr. King said "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice"
14
Hold on Mr Douthat...your headline should read can the extreme left move more towards the center but still left and can mainstream republicans move center/center left.
Despite the election result America is not moving right. They did not elect a ideological right winger who won both the electoral and popular vote.
They elected a rabble rousing, ego maniac, reality show star demagogue who won because he demagogued the plight of the blue collar worker in the rust belt(while Hillary did nothing about it) and he lost the popular vote by millions.
America is moving center/center left from center/center right (1980-2008).
Trump is just an aberration. History has shown that demagogues never do anything for their electorate, just for themselves.
Learn from history or forever be condemned to repeat its' worst aspects.
Despite the election result America is not moving right. They did not elect a ideological right winger who won both the electoral and popular vote.
They elected a rabble rousing, ego maniac, reality show star demagogue who won because he demagogued the plight of the blue collar worker in the rust belt(while Hillary did nothing about it) and he lost the popular vote by millions.
America is moving center/center left from center/center right (1980-2008).
Trump is just an aberration. History has shown that demagogues never do anything for their electorate, just for themselves.
Learn from history or forever be condemned to repeat its' worst aspects.
13
Some of my friends and I believe that the Democrats lost because they did not move further to the left, not the right. Bernie Sanders' message to workers had tremendous resonance with the working class, and I believe that Hillary would have been well-advised to take it up, at least more directly and forcibly.
These are, nevertheless, perceptions and false images promulgated by the Republicans and right-wing politicians. The Democratic Party does not need to forsake its core beliefs simply to garner favor from the right wing parties in this country.
These are, nevertheless, perceptions and false images promulgated by the Republicans and right-wing politicians. The Democratic Party does not need to forsake its core beliefs simply to garner favor from the right wing parties in this country.
16
I think you are really, seriously, out of touch with the real America.
1
The ills of the Democratic party aren't that different from those of the Republican party. Both are built on the status quo model of consumer capitalism and economic colonialism that enriches the elites at the cost of everyone else. When the western democracies exploit a country, the people always come along with the extracted wealth and create the ethnic diversity and cultural pluralism that the current populism rejected in favor of Donald Trump and Brexit. The way forward is not through the past, but toward something that is not yet fully understood and not yet fully formed, a new paradigm that is not post-enlightenment, post-modern, post-anything, but pre-whatever is coming. Whether or not we must first go though 400 years of a new dark ages remains, as yet, to be seen.
10
Another piece lying about Democrats disconnected from the real world. Democrats don't support 'open borders', mass immigration of refugees, or supporting 'no strings dependency.' These are Republican fantasies. Democrats however have supported since FDR a safety net and reasonable regulations to temper the worst excesses of the free market, which do not effectively deal with collective externalities such global warming and environmental degradation, and excesses such as stock market panics. Democrats also have been at the forefront of the civil rights movement since LBJ.
Please try a serious examination of the issues instead of your cartoon preachiness which is both tiresome and not contributing to a serious discussion of the issues, including how Trump's short term grifting of working people threatens their own self interest in the potential destruction of Medicare and Social Security, which have done more to reduce human suffering in this country than any other action in the past century, and which were and still are opposed by most Republicans who have yet to escape from their Ayn Randian fantasies.
Please try a serious examination of the issues instead of your cartoon preachiness which is both tiresome and not contributing to a serious discussion of the issues, including how Trump's short term grifting of working people threatens their own self interest in the potential destruction of Medicare and Social Security, which have done more to reduce human suffering in this country than any other action in the past century, and which were and still are opposed by most Republicans who have yet to escape from their Ayn Randian fantasies.
64
In case you hadn't read it, Hillary supports -- nay, she dreams of -- open borders. That's what she told her pals at Goldman Sachs.
2
Perhaps the Democratic Party and Liberalism have not attracted enough support because they finished the prelude, "..perhaps this is a gross generalization." That phrase should not be made nor completed in a political campaign. What citizens all across the country want are politicians who listen, who can through direct action or legislation make our world better and freer. The current climate of America beyond global warming is fear. Fear generated by job loss and no options readily available, fear of being shot in the back by law enforcement for a traffic violation, fear of losing parents by deportation, fear of losing access to quality healthcare, and fear of student debt and inadequate job opportunities. As long as Liberalism heeds the advice of a wise teacher, "The first shall be last, and the last shall be first." , tax and welfare policy will be more just. The historical strength of liberalism is organization and working in groups; e.g. unions, underground railroad, public education, women's suffrage, civil and voting rights, and peace and environmental marches and protests. Conservatives now rely on the singular 3am Tweets by the solitary Twit. Liberalism is about liberty and justice for all. Conservativism is about power and money for the proud privileged few who are not brave but boisterous and obnoxious. The lie is saying that liberals in Congress would not compromise. The truth is conservatives pledged they would not compromise but obstruct. Tell the truth.
25
I observe that most of the changes you call rightward implicte the identity politics side of the Democratic debate. Notably, you have not called for the tempering of any of the Democratic impulses toward ameliorating inequality, or what used to be part of a job-oriented pro-labor agenda. While you do cite some criminal justice and welfare eligibility initiatives, these i suppose are in between the identity politics and economics wings, not strictly the domain of either.
Perhaps inadvertently, then, your argument tends to strengthen the claims of those Democrats arguing for making primary an economic, universalist agenda designed to yield tangible benefits for working class Americans of all races and backgrounds. Employment, better wages, economic development, wages that keep up with rising costs, tax fairness, defending Medicare and Social Security, protecting the evironment, and attacks on concentrated wealth and disproportionate political power seen in such industries as finance, pharma, and fossil fuels, and yes, rebuilding our infrastructure.
Perhaps inadvertently, then, your argument tends to strengthen the claims of those Democrats arguing for making primary an economic, universalist agenda designed to yield tangible benefits for working class Americans of all races and backgrounds. Employment, better wages, economic development, wages that keep up with rising costs, tax fairness, defending Medicare and Social Security, protecting the evironment, and attacks on concentrated wealth and disproportionate political power seen in such industries as finance, pharma, and fossil fuels, and yes, rebuilding our infrastructure.
3
Why would we want to move right? Who wants to live in a society that values racism, hate for other religions, women and minorities. The Democratic party has moved right. Which is the problem. They are now all Nixon republicans and there fore cannot offer any solution different than the republicans.
Who wants to move right when it means scrapping all social plans, education, health care for all or even seniors. Gutting any welfare programs, cutting teh support for American veterans who the right gleefully sends off to wars.
The party needs to move left hard.
Who wants to move right when it means scrapping all social plans, education, health care for all or even seniors. Gutting any welfare programs, cutting teh support for American veterans who the right gleefully sends off to wars.
The party needs to move left hard.
7
It is hard to know where to begin to respond to this.
Particularly bothersim is the statement that the Democrats have to return to religious pluralism. Members of the religious right are the ones who want to control how people live, who can love whom, etc. They want limited government regulation of everything except the most personal activity and decisions.
They have no understanding of the concept of separation of church and state - the desire for school prayer and for the placement of the Ten Commandments on public buildings being two glaring examples.
The Democrats are not telling anyone they must use birth control, must get abortions, must marry people of the same sex, must pray a certain way, or even must pray at all.
Particularly bothersim is the statement that the Democrats have to return to religious pluralism. Members of the religious right are the ones who want to control how people live, who can love whom, etc. They want limited government regulation of everything except the most personal activity and decisions.
They have no understanding of the concept of separation of church and state - the desire for school prayer and for the placement of the Ten Commandments on public buildings being two glaring examples.
The Democrats are not telling anyone they must use birth control, must get abortions, must marry people of the same sex, must pray a certain way, or even must pray at all.
9
Sorry, Ross,
This country just elected under the Republican banner a man that has not only repudiated many of the beliefs of your party, but has horrified most of the believers of mine. The response to trumps election is not for the Democrats to move right and start shoving people out of its umbrella.
When Trump and the Republicans start trying to implement the vile policies it trumpeted during the election, we will see how the populace actually feels. When your party starts gutting public schools, Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, health care, environmental protections, first Amendment protection, etc. etc. etc., we are going to need the Democrats to protest the dismantling of those policies and programs that the majority of this country prefers to remain in place.
I am sorry that you lost your party when you won the election. The Democrats may have lost the election but we didn't lose our soul.
This country just elected under the Republican banner a man that has not only repudiated many of the beliefs of your party, but has horrified most of the believers of mine. The response to trumps election is not for the Democrats to move right and start shoving people out of its umbrella.
When Trump and the Republicans start trying to implement the vile policies it trumpeted during the election, we will see how the populace actually feels. When your party starts gutting public schools, Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, health care, environmental protections, first Amendment protection, etc. etc. etc., we are going to need the Democrats to protest the dismantling of those policies and programs that the majority of this country prefers to remain in place.
I am sorry that you lost your party when you won the election. The Democrats may have lost the election but we didn't lose our soul.
6
It sure is funny how a different perspective changes one's view of everything.
From my point of view Democrats have been moving steadily rightward since Bill Clinton. And judging from their results, I'd say I have the stronger argument than Douthat. Hillary Clinton is a veritable Neo-Con in her foreign policy. The ACA has some good points here and there, but it fundamentally exists on a mandate to buy insurance from for-profit companies and Obama didn't even fight for the public option or drug bargaining. Wall Street is prioritized above all other financial concerns. White collar over blue. High-end CEOs still make more money in a year than MOST of us will in 6 centuries and often pay lower tax rates. The minimum wage has stagnated for years. Sounds very conservative to me. By comparison, Nixon seems like a radical lefty. And Eisenhower? He's a veritable traitor to the country with all that talk of the military industrial complex.
HIllary was the worst of all worlds. She was a conservative candidate with delusional belief that she was above it all. Come on. I still can't get over her making closed door speeches to bankers for big bucks at a time when she knew she was running for president. How delusionally impervious and imperious can you get? She should have stepped aside for the good of the country.
If Dems want my vote they are going to have to earn it. And the more rightward we drift, the more radical the Dems are going to have to be to be credible.
From my point of view Democrats have been moving steadily rightward since Bill Clinton. And judging from their results, I'd say I have the stronger argument than Douthat. Hillary Clinton is a veritable Neo-Con in her foreign policy. The ACA has some good points here and there, but it fundamentally exists on a mandate to buy insurance from for-profit companies and Obama didn't even fight for the public option or drug bargaining. Wall Street is prioritized above all other financial concerns. White collar over blue. High-end CEOs still make more money in a year than MOST of us will in 6 centuries and often pay lower tax rates. The minimum wage has stagnated for years. Sounds very conservative to me. By comparison, Nixon seems like a radical lefty. And Eisenhower? He's a veritable traitor to the country with all that talk of the military industrial complex.
HIllary was the worst of all worlds. She was a conservative candidate with delusional belief that she was above it all. Come on. I still can't get over her making closed door speeches to bankers for big bucks at a time when she knew she was running for president. How delusionally impervious and imperious can you get? She should have stepped aside for the good of the country.
If Dems want my vote they are going to have to earn it. And the more rightward we drift, the more radical the Dems are going to have to be to be credible.
7
On the other hand, having seen the ugliness of the other way, perhaps Democrats could stand firm on fairness and justice, with a stronger dose of economic opportunity. Douthat wishes to give credit to the demagoguery and viciousness of the Trumpers, and celebrate the malignant gerrymandering launched by Tom DeLay that guaranteed a lot of Republican seats by disenfranchising Democrat voters.
Douthat forgets that the Trumper position will increase climate danger, excite violence, tolerate inequality, and promise jobs it cannot deliver at any price.
Douthat forgets that the Trumper position will increase climate danger, excite violence, tolerate inequality, and promise jobs it cannot deliver at any price.
7
Yes. Progressive liberal Marxist elitist "intellectual" idiot democrats can move right, but it takes rational thought to overcome their feelings. It takes understanding that respecting the inalienable individual rights of others is always the moral path. It takes understanding that force, in all of its forms, including coercion, lying, stealing, cheating, etc. is immoral. When they understand these simple things, they will find a renewed appreciation for the Constitution as it was written, not how some Marxist democrat, like Obama, wishes it was. Suddenly, they realize how important it is to conserve the constitution and they realize they are conservative.
2
The indications are, with Trump's cabinet picks so far and the apparent choice of Mitt Romney as Secretary of State, and with the handling of donations to the inaugural, that this is going to be a plutocratic administration with racist overtones.
Obamacare was unloved - now it's finished. But Paul Ryan and Tom Price intend to also do in Medicare. With the racist tinge of the incoming administration, expect them to at least de-fund if not dissolve the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Then there is Trump's promise of massive tax cuts for the wealthy, to be paid for by cutting social programs. We will see the largest transfer of income upward in the nation's history.
The suffering that Republicans will inflict on most Americans does not suggest that the Democrats should move to the right. Rather, the best course of action would be to return to being the party of William Jennings Bryan, FDR, Henry Wallace, Harry Truman, and Lyndon Johnson. The dominant 'gentry liberal' wing of the Democratic Party, the creation of George McGovern, Fred Dutton, Tony Coelho, Robert Strauss, and the Clintons, has to go.
Obamacare was unloved - now it's finished. But Paul Ryan and Tom Price intend to also do in Medicare. With the racist tinge of the incoming administration, expect them to at least de-fund if not dissolve the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Then there is Trump's promise of massive tax cuts for the wealthy, to be paid for by cutting social programs. We will see the largest transfer of income upward in the nation's history.
The suffering that Republicans will inflict on most Americans does not suggest that the Democrats should move to the right. Rather, the best course of action would be to return to being the party of William Jennings Bryan, FDR, Henry Wallace, Harry Truman, and Lyndon Johnson. The dominant 'gentry liberal' wing of the Democratic Party, the creation of George McGovern, Fred Dutton, Tony Coelho, Robert Strauss, and the Clintons, has to go.
6
The only lesson for the Democrats is that the party needs to renounce its alliance with Wall Street. That's neither right nor left. It's simply a recognition that we should no longer subsidize Wall Street's parasitic existence. Leave Wall Street to the Republican Party. We are already seeing, despite seeming conflict within the Republican Party, that the unifying principle of the Republicans is subsidies for corporations. Let that be made plain.
9
Democrats lost the electoral college for these reasons - a weak message and candidate, and low voter turnout. In effect, it was a mid-term election where 45% of the people stayed away because they saw no difference between the candidates. For those who voted, it was the same dilemma. Many people I've spoken with voted for Trump based upon a distaste for Hillary or on narrow economic interests. There was no buy-in to the GOP agenda. They could just have easily have voted for Hillary. It was a coin toss. The truth is that we are deeply divided country. The Democratic Party needs to rediscover its soul - Bernie showed the way.
5
For the Democrats to regain majority status in the House, Senate, and Executive branches, both in our nation's capital and beyond, they need to remain true to their ideals and not be co-opted by recent elections that seem to indicate a cultural shift to the Right.
This current election will, in time, be viewed as an aberration and not an indication or signal of a national movement to the Right. In order to win, Trump made some "Trump University-like promises" about what he would do if he were elected, and the sad part is that many former middle class factory workers actually believed what he was peddling. As has been said and reported elsewhere, Trump would say whatever he thought would win the hearts and minds of his audience, regardless of its veracity or lack thereof.
Many in the industrial rust belt were swayed by his rhetoric because that's what they wanted to believe. Conversely, Hillary Clinton won the majority of the college educated because they knew that Trump was selling snake oil and little else. But the less educated only knew the pain of losing what they once had and wanted to believe that Trump could pull off an industrial revival of sorts.
Bottom line is, people appreciate authenticity and real compassion. Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and those who share their enthusiasm for justice and fairness in all walks of life, are the future of the Democratic Party and, I believe, will ultimately win the majority of the political battles that lie ahead.
This current election will, in time, be viewed as an aberration and not an indication or signal of a national movement to the Right. In order to win, Trump made some "Trump University-like promises" about what he would do if he were elected, and the sad part is that many former middle class factory workers actually believed what he was peddling. As has been said and reported elsewhere, Trump would say whatever he thought would win the hearts and minds of his audience, regardless of its veracity or lack thereof.
Many in the industrial rust belt were swayed by his rhetoric because that's what they wanted to believe. Conversely, Hillary Clinton won the majority of the college educated because they knew that Trump was selling snake oil and little else. But the less educated only knew the pain of losing what they once had and wanted to believe that Trump could pull off an industrial revival of sorts.
Bottom line is, people appreciate authenticity and real compassion. Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and those who share their enthusiasm for justice and fairness in all walks of life, are the future of the Democratic Party and, I believe, will ultimately win the majority of the political battles that lie ahead.
220
I think your last paragraph says it all. Hillary tried to persuade - but could not convince. A compassionate Democrat could - nay will - have their day. Passion enough to take on the bullies, compassion enough to not ridicule the heartfelt concerns of those who feel left behind. A unifier, not just a social critic.
2
Nice try, Ross. No, we don't need to move right. Your Party has already moved the country so far to the right that we're about to fall into the Atlantic Ocean. What's needed is better messaging by Democrats. They should have a great opportunity coming up as your President shreds every American value and constitutionally enshrined right other than the one that supposedly says we can all buy Uzi's to our heart's content. What the Democrats need to do is shout loud and often to help people see what has been right in front of their eyes for 30 years: your Party only cares about the 1% and wants to return to the 1950's, when women knew their place and white men were in charge. I have to give your guys one thing, Ross, you sure know how to run a con. You've been doing it for 30 years and have convinced just enough people that up is down (with the help of Faux News) to allow you to stay in power. Let's see if the marks remain blind to all the ways they're being cheated when the biggest con man of all starts making decisions from the White House.
6
Well said, Wendy. People want jobs, and GOP trickle down economics has failed to produce good ones, to say nothing of the deregulation that crashed the economy in 2008. With the GOP in control of the White House, Congress, and, soon, the Supreme Court, 31 Governships, 22 states in full control (compared to 3 in Democratic full control) the GOP's fingerprints are all over the situation that we are in. People want change, and they want it to benefit them and their families.
Look at what we've lost in the last 50 years. We used to be able to live a comfortable middle class life on one income which included living in a nice house, sending your kids to state college without onerous debt, having your medical expenses covered if you got sick, and being able to retire, frugally but comfortablly, when you turned 65. And, if you and your kids worked hard and played by the rules, the future was bright. It's all gone.
Elizabeth Warren gets it. Bernie gets it. They know what to do. And, they are not "center". They are progressive, to the left, and that indeed is our future, should we be smart enough to to choose it.
Look at what we've lost in the last 50 years. We used to be able to live a comfortable middle class life on one income which included living in a nice house, sending your kids to state college without onerous debt, having your medical expenses covered if you got sick, and being able to retire, frugally but comfortablly, when you turned 65. And, if you and your kids worked hard and played by the rules, the future was bright. It's all gone.
Elizabeth Warren gets it. Bernie gets it. They know what to do. And, they are not "center". They are progressive, to the left, and that indeed is our future, should we be smart enough to to choose it.
1
The premise of Mr. Douthat's column is so ridiculous that it's hard to know how to respond. Why does the Democratic party need to change its message when its candidate got over two million more votes? How can the Democrats move towards the center when Republicans are constantly trying to move the goalposts rightward? My own feeling is that the Democrats need to sharpen the message to workers that the party is on their side against the Republicans which represent the interests of multinational corporations and oversized banks. There's no doubt that older whiter populations have a political advantage that far outweighs their economic power but, instead of pointing figures at each other, a message of solidarity with all working people from the Democrats, backed with demonstrable action, can bring America together again. During the Trump administration, downtrodden Americans workers will need a voice more than ever.
3
What is up with the NYTs right wing op-ed writers claiming that the Democratic Party under the Clintons and Obama is some far left dirty hippie Bolshie political party that keeps losing because Americans just hate it when government works and makes everybody's life better through things like Medicare, Social Security, affordable education. The Clinton/Obama dems are to the right of Nixon. By todays standards the last liberal president we had was Nixon, nut case that he was he still worked through some policies that had the concept of the The Common Good within them. The EPA, the draft, he even tried and nearly got passed a healthcare law similar to the ACA. For all your fear of a radical Bernie Sanders he would have beeright smack in the center of the Democratic Party circa 1975. Then again, most of what he is for already existed then but has since been taken away. Good jobs, strong unions, affordable college, health care, pensions, civil rights were all taken for granted. Now they are all gone and the Dems had as much of a hand taking them away as the Republicans. Reagan started it but the Clintons accelerated it to the point were we now speak of policies that might help people, the common good, as radical acts. sad.
2
Ross Douthat bases his entire column on a false major premise and then compounds that error by adding the usual Conservative Republican staples of hyperbole and distortion. In the approximately 850 word column he mentions the two word cause of the Democratic defeat only one time, Hilary Clinton. This election was not about ideology as Ross wrongly suggests. It was a personal rejection of a self entitled, flawed, uninspiring candidate, who put wealthy fundraisers and egregious speaking fees above contacts with Rust Belt Democrats. Yet she still won a popular vote victory by a greater margin than 4 presidents elected since 1960. Catholic charities and hospitals were only asked to submit a form saying the wouldn't take part in the ACA."Transgender bathroom directives" were orders from the justice Department to enforce the Equal Protection Clause, something Republicans ignore when it comes to LGBT issues. Where does Ross find the concept of "religious pluralism"in the Constitution? Finally I want him to explain his concept of "moral pluralism"to evangelicals.
1
I'm a 45 year old Democrat from the l4 corridor in Florida. I'm only a Democrat because Florida has a closed primary and I want to be able to vote for someone before the general election. Sanders was my first choice and I was never a fan of Hillary Clinton as a candidate. Trump winning has shaken me to my core. I don't believe this buffoon really represents what the majority of Americans believe. I don't believe we are a country of thin skinned bullies. I think people are excited for change now but his shelf life will expire quickly. at least I hope so. I think both parties are really in a shambles. what we thought was a reasonably mature political system is showing signs of dementia. I can't make any predictions because all of mine have been wrong. but the state of the Democrats and Republicans is very worrisome.
1
The Democratic party is not bucking, Mr. Douthat. Purveyance of truth is buckling. No one who feels that the isomorphic connection between money and power is problematic, and who got truthful information about who Donald Trump is and is not, would have found him a logical choice for the remediation of this nation's problems, or the world's. Decency and compassion as principles will never buckle. Manipulation of information is moving at a pace fast enough to convince people that a liar and narcissist with no moral structure whatsoever and no ideas beyond his own aggrandizement was a reasonable choice for the leader of the free world.
2
Democrats are already in the center. Take healthcare for example. The left end of the spectrum is universal coverage. Most countries have it. The Democrats shifted right and passed RomneyCare- a market-based, government-subsidized healthcare system. In this election, Hillary was actually to the right of Trump on economic issues. Trump sounded like Bernie Sanders. He campaigned on protectionism and a trillion dollar infrastructure program. On immigration, Democrats don't propose open borders. They want tough border security. But they also want a path to legal citizenship. That's just being practical. Our economy needs immigrants. On social issues, Democrats do want a culture-war truce. But Republicans keep waging battle on minority and women's rights. Examples include, new voter suppression laws and closing down abortion clinics. On tougher language, Hillary did use the term "radical Islam" and even created her own demonizing term - "superpredator". Didn't seem to help. She's also rightfully known as a hawk on foreign policy.
Democrats need to focus their messaging on economics. Hillary struggled with that because she was associated with TPP and NAFTA. She was in the center and struggled to move left.
Democrats need to focus their messaging on economics. Hillary struggled with that because she was associated with TPP and NAFTA. She was in the center and struggled to move left.
1
So, the moral of the story is, "if you can't beat'em (the fascists) join'em." Sorry Ross, not in this lifetime. The wiser course for the left would seem to be to fight to protect our Constitution, and our basic way of life, while giving the opposition all the rope it needs to hang itself. When citizens awaken to the realization they have lost Medicare, Social Security and a myriad other programs that make life bearable then there will be a reckoning--not before. The left's long march to the right and its internalization of neoliberalism over the last forty years is no small part of the disaster that has culminated in the election of Donald Trump. Moving rightward to meet the extremists who now constitute the Republican brand would not just constitute capitulation but would signal the end of the Great American Experiment.
2
As far as I know, the Democratic Party doesn't support "open borders". And, if being anti-trade is suddenly centrist, then Sanders is a centrist? As for abortion rights and equal marriage, there's no compromise on these issues. Civil rights can't be negotiated away. A woman's right to control her own body and everyone's right to marry the person they love are moral imperatives for liberals. As for transgender rights, they too are inevitable. Your religious liberty stops where it infringes on my civil rights.
Democrats need to go back to their roots - which is the working and middle class. The Party itself is mostly a fund-raising machine. The reason Sanders did so well in the primaries is because he spoke directly to that reality. And he refused to take money from it. If the Party can do that on a larger scale, they don't have to compromise any liberal principles. No edges to soften.
Because the corruption of the system is at the heart of Trump's rise, his own corruption (and the GOP's) will bring them down. Democrats needs to be ready when that happens. And it's not about moving right politically. It's about *doing* right ethically.
Democrats need to go back to their roots - which is the working and middle class. The Party itself is mostly a fund-raising machine. The reason Sanders did so well in the primaries is because he spoke directly to that reality. And he refused to take money from it. If the Party can do that on a larger scale, they don't have to compromise any liberal principles. No edges to soften.
Because the corruption of the system is at the heart of Trump's rise, his own corruption (and the GOP's) will bring them down. Democrats needs to be ready when that happens. And it's not about moving right politically. It's about *doing* right ethically.
2
The Democrats' loss in the presidential election had nothing to do with the party being too far to the left, which it patently wasn't despite Douthat's attempt to characterize it that way as the basis of his continued false narrative (which the NYT allows him to perpetuate).
Rather, it was the failure of the Democrats to market themselves with the same cynical lie-driven tactics of the Republicans. How else to explain the fact that millions of Americans voted against their economic self-interests?
The fact is that on most social, economic, and foreign policy issues the majority of Americans agree with the Democratic positions, often by a wide margin. What is called for is are far more aggressive campaign strategies that give the people what they need to hear and understand - that Democratic programs and values provide the best means for the country to escape the death spiral of ignorance and deceit that the last campaign embodied.
Rather, it was the failure of the Democrats to market themselves with the same cynical lie-driven tactics of the Republicans. How else to explain the fact that millions of Americans voted against their economic self-interests?
The fact is that on most social, economic, and foreign policy issues the majority of Americans agree with the Democratic positions, often by a wide margin. What is called for is are far more aggressive campaign strategies that give the people what they need to hear and understand - that Democratic programs and values provide the best means for the country to escape the death spiral of ignorance and deceit that the last campaign embodied.
I said it once and I'll say it again. I voted for Hillary mainly because her economic policy is far better for my pocketbook along with her stance on lowering the the age for Medicare.
But that's not what the vast majority of other the other white working class voters went for Mr. Trump. Mrs. Clinton pandered far too much to the supporters of illegal immigration and groups like BLM. When the white working class voters saw time and time again Mrs.Clinton promising Hispanics they won't be deported and the Charlotte riots supporting groups like BLM who, whether they intended to or not, represented the destruction of private property that stood out first and foremost in the undecided voters mind. Especially when Mr. Trump time and time again pledged to be the "Law and Order President." Those optics is what turned the election for Mr. Trump and with good reason.
But that's not what the vast majority of other the other white working class voters went for Mr. Trump. Mrs. Clinton pandered far too much to the supporters of illegal immigration and groups like BLM. When the white working class voters saw time and time again Mrs.Clinton promising Hispanics they won't be deported and the Charlotte riots supporting groups like BLM who, whether they intended to or not, represented the destruction of private property that stood out first and foremost in the undecided voters mind. Especially when Mr. Trump time and time again pledged to be the "Law and Order President." Those optics is what turned the election for Mr. Trump and with good reason.
2
It's all in the messaging. Media control is very powerful, so powerful that people end up doing things they would never consider (think 1930's). Media control drives innuendo, lies, false news and group hysteria. Group hysteria is very motivating. Trump and his likes (Conway, Bannon) are expert at creating hysteria, they are drama queens. They can be deflated easily by a willing press, which can lead the public in a thoughtful discourse rather than a reading of "chicken little". The outrageous statements made (taking away citizenship, deporting, etc) feed into a "group mind" which captures the radical mindset. This is not rocket science. The Democratic Party has an angry group that can be tapped, Sanders did, and this should continue under the leadership of Sanders, Clinton, Obama and Biden, as they bring in the younger stars. No time for being crybabies. It is high time to stop thinking of the election as over, in a sense, with media, it is never over. Time for 2018, it must start today, no time to waste.
3
I would prefer the Democrats "moved right" rather than "moved Right", which means they should "move Left", rediscover the roots of Franklin Roosevelt and even the 1990's Bill Clinton, and stop acting as Republicans in disguise, which is what Hillary and the 2016 version of her husband came to represent. (I suppose they were both on the side of the poor and the meek until their assets suddenly exceeded $ 100 million and placed them in the camp of the 0.1 %).
The U.S. is sorely lacking in justice and fairness for all, the pillars on which it succeeded magnificently in the post-WWII period. It's now all about material success, competition between social strata and sound bytes to fool the majority into acting against their own interests.
Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are breaths of fresh air, but will the party apparatchiks ever support them?
The U.S. is sorely lacking in justice and fairness for all, the pillars on which it succeeded magnificently in the post-WWII period. It's now all about material success, competition between social strata and sound bytes to fool the majority into acting against their own interests.
Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are breaths of fresh air, but will the party apparatchiks ever support them?
1
If what you say is true, how do you explain the excitement around Bernie Sanders' campaign? Sanders brought many very liberal ideas to the table and there was great enthusiasm around his campaign. In fact I almost thought the U.S. could become like the rest of the industrialized world by enacting universal health care and post secondary education. The neocons of the Clinton ilk have not inspired much excitement for a while now.
The voters have sensed that since the Citizens United decision, politicians are courting money, not voters. This applies to both parties, and so enthusiasm for "outsiders" continues. Unfortunately they chose a candidate whose main trait is greed, not service.
The voters have sensed that since the Citizens United decision, politicians are courting money, not voters. This applies to both parties, and so enthusiasm for "outsiders" continues. Unfortunately they chose a candidate whose main trait is greed, not service.
2
This is an argument for totalitarianism; for a far-right wing nativist-fascist party and a 2nd right-wing party. It's blatantly manipulative, resting on lies that the right is infallible; discrediting all things progressive, left, and liberal. What's the real reason that the Democrats have lost representation "in most states, most House districts, most Senate races"? Why does the Democratic Party have less "political power than it did after the Reagan revolution”? Because Republicans have spent 50+ years destroying American representative democracy by rigging the system. Forgetting the Electoral College, where a person who gets 1 vote in California would get 3.6 votes in Missouri, there’s a small matter of voter suppression and Republican Gerrymandering manipulation at the state level. In Pennsylvania alone Democrats got only 25% of the House seats though winning over 50% of the vote; a vote cast by a Republican was worth 2x that of a Democrat living a few blocks away. All Douthat’s proven is that Republican control is only possible because they’ve created a system where “elected representation” is a lie. Finally, how can Douthat pretend that Donald Trump is “a hard-right candidate on certain issues but a radical sort of centrist on trade, infrastructure and entitlements” when he’s appointed only far right ideologues, foreign policy hawks, and Wall Street billionaires who plan to gut Medicare? It is Bush 43 pumped up by Putin’s Olympic Steroid Program and enforced by the FSB.
4
Ross both parties support the collection of mega data, secret courts, murder by Presidential decree and secret wars that target civilians. The last two Presidents both supported almost identical immigration reform policies.
You really think that Democrats have lost the Congress, Senate Presidency and most of the State houses because they insist that Catholic bakers make cakes for gays who get married?
The real problem the Democrats have is the American public no longer trusts their government. The reason they don't is Republicans have been running the government for almost 2 decades. Without a Democratic figure head to take the blame the public will be clear on who to blame. The sugar rush of tax cuts will probably wear off before the next election.
You really think that Democrats have lost the Congress, Senate Presidency and most of the State houses because they insist that Catholic bakers make cakes for gays who get married?
The real problem the Democrats have is the American public no longer trusts their government. The reason they don't is Republicans have been running the government for almost 2 decades. Without a Democratic figure head to take the blame the public will be clear on who to blame. The sugar rush of tax cuts will probably wear off before the next election.
3
Um, no. The people who voted for DT--though they certainly were energized by xenophobia, tacit or explicit biogtry, and fear of the other--also faced legitimate economic concerns that have to do with the outright failure of capital. And who addressed that failure most honestly? Who resonated with workers in the blighted Rust Belt, who eventually flipped and went over to the flaccid conman? Who treated late capitalism like the horrific crisis that it was, instead of some problem to be addressed over two or three decades of incremental tweaks? (Remember: The system can stay insolvent longer than you can stay alive). It wasn't the center-right democrat. It was the center-left one; the one reviving mainstream social democratic principles.
Immiserated Americans were took by a greasy millionaire straight out of the DSM-V. But many of them are ready for an economic arrangement that is far more to the left than anything in the nation's history. The task will be breaking their ideology through open, face-to-face conversations. How would they feel if they could own and operate their own businesses with their fellow workers? How would they feel if they didn't have to face a $15k deductible? How would they feel if they could stick it to the monopolies that have been ripping them off for forty years? My guess is that they would feel pretty good.
Immiserated Americans were took by a greasy millionaire straight out of the DSM-V. But many of them are ready for an economic arrangement that is far more to the left than anything in the nation's history. The task will be breaking their ideology through open, face-to-face conversations. How would they feel if they could own and operate their own businesses with their fellow workers? How would they feel if they didn't have to face a $15k deductible? How would they feel if they could stick it to the monopolies that have been ripping them off for forty years? My guess is that they would feel pretty good.
2
How willingly we hold to the idea that a world as complex as ours can be divided into right and left. This country is a diffuse cloud of disparate interests all struggling to have their voice be heard. Standing out in the cloud is like being in fashion, and it frequently comes with compensation. There is money and 'likes' to be made in issues. Being right or left is way to make a living, build a network, satisfy your ego. Agenda franchises. And when your prophets invariably preach for profit, that explains why we so often feel nothing ever changes.
Shifting positions. Admitting there could be even the slightest merit in another point of view comes with peril. You could lose following.
In our heart of hearts I think we as a country know it is not black and white. That being pro choice and female reproductive rights is a strong and worthy issue. But equally we know that to some, abortion cannot be seen without seeing the death of person who could have been -- and the push back is understandable.
So our democracy really exists as a cantilever. Perhaps we need to admit that the bridge stands because opposing forces push against each other. Parties want to push us to extremes, both left and right guilty of aggression. But we have to see past their need to pander to the extremes. I think the truth of American life exists in the in-between.
Shifting positions. Admitting there could be even the slightest merit in another point of view comes with peril. You could lose following.
In our heart of hearts I think we as a country know it is not black and white. That being pro choice and female reproductive rights is a strong and worthy issue. But equally we know that to some, abortion cannot be seen without seeing the death of person who could have been -- and the push back is understandable.
So our democracy really exists as a cantilever. Perhaps we need to admit that the bridge stands because opposing forces push against each other. Parties want to push us to extremes, both left and right guilty of aggression. But we have to see past their need to pander to the extremes. I think the truth of American life exists in the in-between.
4
The democratic party offers the country much more if the consequence for holding steadfast to ideals were it to become a minority party. I don't believe that's the consequence, but if it were, so what? This multicultural country of multi-regional and multi-economic influences needs many vibrant colors not a few shades of black. But i just wish we can move from right and left ideology and instead read op-eds sharing ideas on climate change solutions, wealth disparity, globalization, and health care to name a few. I suppose the media is forever stuck in the mud of the tired old themes and debates over left and right over right and wrong.
2
The great fiction here is that the Democrats have gone off the charts left and need to get back to the center that is dominated by the right. Nothing could be further from the truth. Obama has represented the center for 8 years and the Democrats sound rejection of Bernie Sanders shows that there has been no vast migration to the left. Yes, Trump swooped in a picked up the disaffected rural and rust-belt voters. But that was not with any great right-wing social agenda, but with a parade of lies about how he was going to return dying industries to our nation. It will never happen. Once these fictions become apparent and Trump is outed for the kleptocrat he is, the disaffected will have the chance to see that the Democrats offer the only meaningful path to economic recovery and a better way of life.
171
Sound rejection of Sanders? He took the party favorite (and documented party favoritism), to the left and had the primaries not been rigged by the DNC, he may have gotten the momentum he needed. But your more central point is the most errant. First, those rural and rust-belt voters see Trump for what he is. They like the idea that someone sees what has happened to them, but they understand reversing the recent past is a tall order. They will take what they get, but they don't see a full rebirth through Trump. What they do not want is any leftist/elitist/Democratic solution that treats them like a special identity group unable to rely on their own hard work to meet their needs and pursue their idea of happiness. Clinton lost because she was a poor candidate. It is easy to say that is because she was a poor politician, but much less easy to see that she embodied the very ideas that make liberalism repugnant to the working class, who, for all their collective wisdom and life-experience, elitists call poorly educated. Trump got it. Elitists ridiculed him when he said he loved the poorly educated. But the working class understood the subtext of what their betters thought was a Trump-killing sound-bite.
1
Wow. This is messed up. Douthat and others suggest that it's Democrats who need to do some soul searching, Democrats, under whose watch the economy has consistently done better, both in terms of GDP and job creation, than Republicans, as well as debt and deficit reduction (even surplus, in the case of Bill Clinton), because Democrats committed some "culture war" crime of saying that intense, increasing, and mainstreaming bigotry and a candidate espousing it and running on it is deplorable?
"What went wrong" is that this country elected a man who knows nothing about the US Constitution to defend and uphold that document, a man who admitted to serial sexual assault, with at least a dozen women to correlate his own claim, a man who, despite earning a billion dollars, paid no income taxes to the country he professes to love while also saying he's the voice of the working man who does pay income taxes on very little income, a man who has very severe personality disorders, starting with pathological narcissism, a man who has never done anything altruistic for anyone in his entire life and in fact has taken charitable donations and spent them on himself, a man who just paid a $25 million settlement for defrauding those same people he claims to care about, and a man who has the emotional IQ of a lonely, angry 10 year old, Tweeting his rage manically and at anyone who dares say anything negative about him. That is what went wrong, Ross.
"What went wrong" is that this country elected a man who knows nothing about the US Constitution to defend and uphold that document, a man who admitted to serial sexual assault, with at least a dozen women to correlate his own claim, a man who, despite earning a billion dollars, paid no income taxes to the country he professes to love while also saying he's the voice of the working man who does pay income taxes on very little income, a man who has very severe personality disorders, starting with pathological narcissism, a man who has never done anything altruistic for anyone in his entire life and in fact has taken charitable donations and spent them on himself, a man who just paid a $25 million settlement for defrauding those same people he claims to care about, and a man who has the emotional IQ of a lonely, angry 10 year old, Tweeting his rage manically and at anyone who dares say anything negative about him. That is what went wrong, Ross.
514
Right on Virginia! Well said!
1
The better question will be can Republicans move left? Ross keeps forgetting Republicans lost the popular vote. They are on the wrong side of macroeconomics, on the wrong side of history, and their base now has sold it's soul to Trump who has no values. When Republicans overreach and they surely will, no amount of money and propaganda will save them from defeat. Evangelicals voted for Trump and poor whites voted for Trump thinking he would save them, he would bring back their jobs. When they see that con for what it is we now know they will vote for relieving their economic misery. It's sad that White America thinks that corporate America who outsourced millions of their jobs will want to save the very same people that have no use for. Much of flyover America refuses to accept why they are not enjoying prosperity in 21st century America because that would be an admission of being wrong. Wrong about how they have treated others, wrong about not supporting science and education, wrong about not evolving from their tribalistic view of society. Their rigidity to change has left them without the skills that corporate America demands for a knowledge based economy. Discrimination and sexism are not OK anymore. Being uneducated and White will not save you from being relegated to the same economic level as other uneducated people in a globalized economy led by multinationals. Their only help will come from the one thing Republicans oppose - a government of the people for the people.
131
Left, right - it really doesn't matter. The reality is that the Democratic party has been consigned to irrelevance, where it will likely stay for the foreseeable future.
Everyone is now aware that the GOP now controls the Executive and Legislative branches of the Federal government. In the very near future, President Trump will appoint [several] new judges to the Supreme Court, something that will ensure a highly conservative SCOTUS for a decade or more.
GOP control doesn't end at the Federal level however. The governors of 31 states are Republicans and in 25 states, there is a GOP trifecta (control of the executive, legislative & judicial branches). The GOP controls a majority of county and local governments. The majority of school boards in the US are under GOP control. Citizen's United practically guarantees that these GOP majorities will grow.
Unfortunately for Democrats, it gets even worse. Full GOP control of the US through the next census in 2020 is a near-certainty. This will in turn mean that voting districts, already gerrymandered to ensure maximum GOP advantage, will be redrawn to ensure even tighter GOP control.
So we see that the question is not whether the Democrats need to move left or right but is rather whether the Democrats - or any political party other than the GOP for that matter - will have any relevance in the new Red America.
Everyone is now aware that the GOP now controls the Executive and Legislative branches of the Federal government. In the very near future, President Trump will appoint [several] new judges to the Supreme Court, something that will ensure a highly conservative SCOTUS for a decade or more.
GOP control doesn't end at the Federal level however. The governors of 31 states are Republicans and in 25 states, there is a GOP trifecta (control of the executive, legislative & judicial branches). The GOP controls a majority of county and local governments. The majority of school boards in the US are under GOP control. Citizen's United practically guarantees that these GOP majorities will grow.
Unfortunately for Democrats, it gets even worse. Full GOP control of the US through the next census in 2020 is a near-certainty. This will in turn mean that voting districts, already gerrymandered to ensure maximum GOP advantage, will be redrawn to ensure even tighter GOP control.
So we see that the question is not whether the Democrats need to move left or right but is rather whether the Democrats - or any political party other than the GOP for that matter - will have any relevance in the new Red America.
48
The only way the GOP when is by cheating and this is been going on for decades now. Eventually this will catch up to them but in fortunately they can do a great deal of damage before they get caught in their own webs.
1
Russ always cracks me up! "There has been much less conversation about the ways in which the Democratic Party might consider responding to its current straits by moving to the right."
We had an election where the winner was the loser for 2nd time in 16 years, and Democrats won the popular vote for the presidency in 7 of the last 8 elections, and more people voted for Democratic senators than for Republican senators, and Republicans won 51% of the vote for the House but 57% of the seats, and places like Wisconsin where Republicans win 48% of the votes but 60% of the seats, and Russ's question is whether Democrats should "move right."
No. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by 1.7% and 2.2 million votes; just because 5,000 people in Iowa voted for Trump instead of Clinton after the Comey Affair and flipped the state, and after horrific press coverage of innuendo as fact - does not mean that the Democrats need to move right. What they need to do is undo the damage done by Republicans where the minority party continues to win - and, I will add this - talk about people's problems, not what bathrooms they use.
I'll give Russ that much. No more.
We had an election where the winner was the loser for 2nd time in 16 years, and Democrats won the popular vote for the presidency in 7 of the last 8 elections, and more people voted for Democratic senators than for Republican senators, and Republicans won 51% of the vote for the House but 57% of the seats, and places like Wisconsin where Republicans win 48% of the votes but 60% of the seats, and Russ's question is whether Democrats should "move right."
No. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by 1.7% and 2.2 million votes; just because 5,000 people in Iowa voted for Trump instead of Clinton after the Comey Affair and flipped the state, and after horrific press coverage of innuendo as fact - does not mean that the Democrats need to move right. What they need to do is undo the damage done by Republicans where the minority party continues to win - and, I will add this - talk about people's problems, not what bathrooms they use.
I'll give Russ that much. No more.
193
I cannot find anywhere documentation that either campaign focused on winning the popular vote. You seem to be playing checkers while the rest are playing chess. If the campaigns were about popular vote, then the objective changes and candidates campaign in such a way that maximizes their vote count. But it's ridiculous to keep mentioning popular when the objective is to get to 270 electoral votes first. Using your thinking, there was no winner this year in MLB, because the Cubs and Indians both scored 27 runs. Cleveland isn't claiming a co-championship. They weren't playing for run count. There is no value whatsoever in claiming a prize no one was seeking. When our system becomes entirely a direct democracy, you will finally get to play the game you think you want.
2
I am a lifelong Democrat whose immediate family of 7 includes 4 Jews, a gay Latina, an immigrant, and a 30 something trans person (my son). I also happen to live in a rural, overwhelmingly white section of the country. I first had serious concerns about this election the day the Obama Education Department released its "dear colleague" letter mandating trans access to the school bathrooms and locker rooms of their choice. It demonstrated to me just how out of touch the Democratic party establishment was with the real concerns of the electorate. It was also tailor made for Republican ridicule and abuse. We need to get real and focus on the economic concerns of the lower 90% while remaining true to our historic vision of equal rights for all. I hate to say it but Trump's announcement this morning of "saving" 1000 Carrier jobs is exactly the kind of thing Obama should have been working on this spring and summer. If he had, there's a good chance President Clinton could have pushed for some social progress over the next 4 years.
100
Cough, Cough - remember the auto industry?
4
Saving jobs and creating them is what Obama should have been doing in 2008, instead of hijacking the healthcare system with the ACA.
2
Obama save the entire American auto industry yet he gets no credit for saving those jobs. He has created 5 million jobs during his eight years in office yet he gets no credit for those jobs either. He had a very robust infrastructure program ready to go but the Republicans in the house kept throwing up roadblocks to new roads bridges tunnels in schools. Maybe you should read a little bit before you voice such an unschooled opinion.
4
Do Brooks and Douthat live on another plane of reality. The absurdist quest to appropriate the erstwhile center right position and constituency that was the pre Reagan Republican Party has been the mantra that had driven the Democratic Party's effort since The Clinton's first came to town.
Hillary's failure was incisive identity politics, it was her obsessive affinity for hanging out with wealthy donors. Yes the electorate has been beguiled by a faux populist who plays a billionaire on TV. But the denizens of the rusty ruin chose him because they bought his carney barker shtick about the little guy.
Had the Democratic establishment, and the print and media oracles have paid anything like equal time and interest in Bernie Sanders, he would be choosing his staff and cabinet right now. Had Hillary spent less time at fundraising soirées in the Hamptons, and more time in the rust belt, she would likely be drafting her inaugural address now.
But no, spending more time trying to triangulate the message while you cuddle with the donor class, that bolt's been fired and it was a miss.
Hillary's failure was incisive identity politics, it was her obsessive affinity for hanging out with wealthy donors. Yes the electorate has been beguiled by a faux populist who plays a billionaire on TV. But the denizens of the rusty ruin chose him because they bought his carney barker shtick about the little guy.
Had the Democratic establishment, and the print and media oracles have paid anything like equal time and interest in Bernie Sanders, he would be choosing his staff and cabinet right now. Had Hillary spent less time at fundraising soirées in the Hamptons, and more time in the rust belt, she would likely be drafting her inaugural address now.
But no, spending more time trying to triangulate the message while you cuddle with the donor class, that bolt's been fired and it was a miss.
2
2.3 million people more than those who voted for Trump, voted for a weak and compromised leftist candidate, Hillary Clinton. Her major defect was only that she had so little true leftist bona fides. Moving to the right by Bill Clinton and his ties to his wife is what cost her the election (that she actually won in the democratic sense and only after voter suppression that could not have happened before the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act, is testament to our present "democratic" (but not really democratic) reality. Trump's loss is the right's disaster unless he can consolidate an end to democracy in the United States. The question on the right is, "Are you willing to sacrifice your most basic constitutional and democratic values for power that you cannot retain forever?" It's a Faustian deal with the devil Trump. And we know how that story ends. A minority will never rule the USA. The Republican view is a shrinking minority whose policies have consistently failed to improve the economy or shrink the deficit as much as the democrats. They are good at criticizing democratic presidents. They are bad at policy when in power. They are now in power and will fail (as always). 2018 will be the year the old right collapsed. Trump will be the straw that broke the Elephant's corrupt and hypocritical back.
5
Democrats may be wringing their hands over mis-calculating their elections strategies, and rightly so. But I doubt that there need to be the amount of adjustment of beliefs and goals that Mr. Douthat advocates here. The public, including those who voted for Trump, will see soon enough the ideological extremism, the incompetence, and the corruption inherent in the way the presidency will be conducted. The GWB years of incompetence and duplicity, I suspect, will pale in the face of the prospects of the Trump administration. Meanwhile the Democrats need to be vigilant and in considered opposition. Tiime itself will be on their side come future elections.
1
Did the Republiicans move left on the election of Obama? Nope, they just dug in their heels and become the party of total intransigence.
Dems have already moved too far right since the Clinton presidency. There is nothing in the election of Donald Trump to suggest a further move since he did not run on the traditional Republican ideology, and even if he had, this was an amazingly policy free (and fact free) election. Remember, Bernie did well too.
Democrats should continue to stand by their principles. Unlike how the Republicans behaved, they should compromise when possible, but they should stand up for principles when reasonable compromise is not possible.
The Republicans may benefit from a slowly improving economy which has nothing to do with their favored policies. They may even (predictably) ditch their concern with deficits and government spending and engage in stimulus spending (which is okay with them only when they are in charge of it). But one thing for sure: their policies will NOT benefit ordinary Americans economically, they will only further enrich the haves and likely lead to another economic crunch. Dems should stand by what they believe is right and be ready to pick up the pieces, or take advantage when the public tires of the Republican's thin gruel and over-reach.
Dems have already moved too far right since the Clinton presidency. There is nothing in the election of Donald Trump to suggest a further move since he did not run on the traditional Republican ideology, and even if he had, this was an amazingly policy free (and fact free) election. Remember, Bernie did well too.
Democrats should continue to stand by their principles. Unlike how the Republicans behaved, they should compromise when possible, but they should stand up for principles when reasonable compromise is not possible.
The Republicans may benefit from a slowly improving economy which has nothing to do with their favored policies. They may even (predictably) ditch their concern with deficits and government spending and engage in stimulus spending (which is okay with them only when they are in charge of it). But one thing for sure: their policies will NOT benefit ordinary Americans economically, they will only further enrich the haves and likely lead to another economic crunch. Dems should stand by what they believe is right and be ready to pick up the pieces, or take advantage when the public tires of the Republican's thin gruel and over-reach.
2
The Democratic part shows no signs of moderating itself, which is why it's going to continue to lose election after election. Bernie Sanders message on wealth redistribution was a hit because its typical populist rhetoric for the have-nots during a time of economic anxiety, as is free college and universal healthcare. It's catchy and infectious because of how fantastical it sounds, but it's completely unrealistic in our political environment. Even if he beated Trump, the Republicans still own congress, and why did Vermont of all places elect a Republican governor? Obamacare - the half measure - took enormous political capital to pass during a time when Democrats had both houses, and the party is still suffering the blowback from that. People need to stop deluding themselves into thinking the country is really just a closeted liberal and if only we can "activate" the populace. Fact of the matter is we have a large number of people who lean right and we have to find an amicable solution for both. Otherwise we are going to take turns ramrodding the other side with extreme policies like what the Right is doing now. And FYI: I'm a registered Democrat but I agree with a lot of conservative ideals, just not their methods or their party. Personal responsibility, family values, strong defense, secure borders, respect for the law, respect for one's beliefs, balanced budgets, and promoting business sounds as good to me as diversity, equal opportunity, gender equality, and civil rights.
2
The commentary does neglect the fact that the Democratic Party gained seats in the senate and the house and also won the popular vote. Also left and right orientations are replaced by progressive (democrats), reactionary (republicans) and populists (democrat and republican)voters. Bernie Sanders stood for the progressive-populist movement and Donald Trump (beside standing mostly for his own interests) stood for the populist-reactionary one: their voters right now (falsely) feel: what's good for me, is good for the country. In the globally connected world we created, that's a dangerous sentiment. What the world and with that I mean the civilization we erected on the Earth is a popular-global progressive approach where we correct the multi-dimensional asymmetry between the rich and the poor with the goal of a peaceful and just world civilization. The biggest obstacle might be the poor adaptation of Homo sapiens herself to the world we created.
1
I would say that the traditional small government, low-tax policies which have been associated with conservatives and the Republican party in the past have little to do with party affiliation or voting patterns today. Unfortunately, most voters don't examine issues other than those which make them feel threatened and afraid: loss of control by whites, that a particular group of people threaten their safety, the fear that the government is going to take away their guns, etc. Social issues like abortion and prayer in schools also play an important role for some. Most voters are in the low- and middle-income brackets; yet, they seem oblivious to the fact that most of the tax cuts proposed by Republicans always favor the wealthy. They care very little about issues such as climate change and the outrageous amount of money spent in elections. If by moving to the right you mean embracing those policies of fear, then Democrats could probably benefit politically--an example of fighting fire with fire. I hope that won't happen.
1
I consider myself a progressive Democrat. I never voted for Bernie Sanders because I doubted his ability to win, but his positions cheered my heart. I believe we need to take those positions and adapt them to our globalized economy and to the challenges presented by technology.
I particularly appreciate that Senator Sanders made it once more acceptable to call ourselves liberal. That liberalism is not particularly "left" and it is what appealed to so many young people in the primaries.
The reality is that increasingly many jobs can be done remotely making borders less meaningful, except as symbols. Tom Friedman wrote "The World is Flat" years ago and it's getting flatter all the time.
Desexed bathrooms are meaningful only as another symbol of respect for people who are different. It's not a bad thing that many young people just don't understand why differences should be stamped out.
Guaranteed income might be the way to address the rising inequality that's undermining democracy around the world. Inequality is one of the most pressing issues of the day and conservatives have no tools in their ideological tool kit to address it.
Dealing with refugees is another problem that becomes critical because displaced people create instability. It's hardly forward looking to just deny that the problem exists.
So, none of these are "somewhat-radical causes." And we haven't mentioned inequality and climate change.
I particularly appreciate that Senator Sanders made it once more acceptable to call ourselves liberal. That liberalism is not particularly "left" and it is what appealed to so many young people in the primaries.
The reality is that increasingly many jobs can be done remotely making borders less meaningful, except as symbols. Tom Friedman wrote "The World is Flat" years ago and it's getting flatter all the time.
Desexed bathrooms are meaningful only as another symbol of respect for people who are different. It's not a bad thing that many young people just don't understand why differences should be stamped out.
Guaranteed income might be the way to address the rising inequality that's undermining democracy around the world. Inequality is one of the most pressing issues of the day and conservatives have no tools in their ideological tool kit to address it.
Dealing with refugees is another problem that becomes critical because displaced people create instability. It's hardly forward looking to just deny that the problem exists.
So, none of these are "somewhat-radical causes." And we haven't mentioned inequality and climate change.
3
There is more to the political process than winning. Moderate and conservative Republicans have adopted a winning strategy, never compromise. They hold to their ideals, and advocate for them, even when it is unpopular. But, they may become examples of the advertising truism, the best way to kill a bad product is with good advertising.
Only time will tell how much damage the Trump administration will do to the country. Unfortunately tearing things down is a lot easier than building them up, so with all branches of the Federal government controlled by the Republican party they can quickly turn the clock back, but they are unlikely to “Make America Great Again.”
I hope that I am wrong, but what if I and others like me who have a vision of hope are right? Half way bad ideas that are crafted solely out of political opportunism will not be effective. In the next two to four years there will be a reckoning one way or the other. Either Trumpism will succeed or Democrats will need to make sure that they do not help carry the water of their failure by advocating for slightly more temperate forms of the same bad ideas. Democrats must stand for effective policy ideas, not ideology, and we need to create a sense of identity that is emotionally appealing to all Americans. I doubt that will put us in the political center. It is a little bit like the old joke of looking for you keys where it is well lit because it is easier to see, rather than in the place where you lost them.
Only time will tell how much damage the Trump administration will do to the country. Unfortunately tearing things down is a lot easier than building them up, so with all branches of the Federal government controlled by the Republican party they can quickly turn the clock back, but they are unlikely to “Make America Great Again.”
I hope that I am wrong, but what if I and others like me who have a vision of hope are right? Half way bad ideas that are crafted solely out of political opportunism will not be effective. In the next two to four years there will be a reckoning one way or the other. Either Trumpism will succeed or Democrats will need to make sure that they do not help carry the water of their failure by advocating for slightly more temperate forms of the same bad ideas. Democrats must stand for effective policy ideas, not ideology, and we need to create a sense of identity that is emotionally appealing to all Americans. I doubt that will put us in the political center. It is a little bit like the old joke of looking for you keys where it is well lit because it is easier to see, rather than in the place where you lost them.
2
So the Republican party that uses identity politics, class warfare, xenophobia and misogyny is the party that the Democrats should emulate? The results would be a one party system very similar to Russia. The American voter would be left with a choice between Make America Great 1950s style or Make America Great 1850s style not a good choice for a country that has help lead the world towards the future. The Democrats won the popular vote one more time because the majority of the voters want to embrace the future. The Republican strategy is very short term in success which has been rigged every possible way to win so the last thing the Democrats should do is move to the right. Bernie Sanders proved it the voters are moving more to the left. Go with the flow.
6
I don't think Trump won on a shift to the center. Both parties must place jobs and the economy at the core of their platforms; to suggest this was Trump's ingenious move or Hillary's folly is to accept the false narrative that President Obama and the Democrats had not been focused on reviving the economy and had been quite successful. Appealing to the Midwest by focusing on bringing back manufacturing and coal may appear novel, but it is not all that different from Republican emphasis on small businesses and "real America," while also running counter to reality in which manufacturing and coal will never come back to the levels of economic development they reached in the mid-20th century. What changed for the the Republicans was the messaging and the messenger. That's where Democrats must change. We're in the age of aesthetic, rightly or wrongly, and nothing justifies the triumph of style over substance than the election of a grifter with no political experience who spent the whole campaign promising the moon and the stars like the candidate for president of your high school class that promised your favorite fast food chain will be served in the cafeteria if you elect him. Maybe not feel the Bern; but incinerate the Trump.
3
The late philosopher Richard Rorty warns us against over-using metaphors such as "left," "right," or "center." They remove us from the reality of what we are trying to say.
While these terms might serve us well on a flat surface or in three-dimensional space, they mean lots of things to lots of different people. And if we give these words a pass and do not challenge them, we end up with fuzzy meaning.
The Democratic Party needs to start talking about real issues that effect real families of the working and middle classes --- jobs, wages, cost of education, health care, and respect for working people and law-abiding people. President Obama, for example, gave the white collar crooks of 2008 a "Don't Go To Jail" card. Hillary hid behind her "Blue Wall" of affluent Democratic areas while avoiding the "Deplorables" who inhabited the rural and rust belt areas (formerly known as "safe" Democratic districts.
Start using straight language and avoid euphemisms and similes. And, by the way, stop throwing out complex terms like "global capitalism" and "technological innovation" as if they are inexorable forces that we do not have the intelligence or imagination to deal with. Jobs are disappearing because corporations are making these decisions. People need better and more honest explanations.
Trump is leaving no rock unturned in his efforts to slap together an administration. We'll be hearing plenty of nonsense in the next few months and years. Stick to straight talk.
While these terms might serve us well on a flat surface or in three-dimensional space, they mean lots of things to lots of different people. And if we give these words a pass and do not challenge them, we end up with fuzzy meaning.
The Democratic Party needs to start talking about real issues that effect real families of the working and middle classes --- jobs, wages, cost of education, health care, and respect for working people and law-abiding people. President Obama, for example, gave the white collar crooks of 2008 a "Don't Go To Jail" card. Hillary hid behind her "Blue Wall" of affluent Democratic areas while avoiding the "Deplorables" who inhabited the rural and rust belt areas (formerly known as "safe" Democratic districts.
Start using straight language and avoid euphemisms and similes. And, by the way, stop throwing out complex terms like "global capitalism" and "technological innovation" as if they are inexorable forces that we do not have the intelligence or imagination to deal with. Jobs are disappearing because corporations are making these decisions. People need better and more honest explanations.
Trump is leaving no rock unturned in his efforts to slap together an administration. We'll be hearing plenty of nonsense in the next few months and years. Stick to straight talk.
8
This article is actually totally and completely wrong. The real problem the Democrats faced and always face is that they cannot get out the vote. The fact that barely more than 50% of Americans voted in the last election is the real issue and the real story. The fact that less than 25% of the eligible voting population chose a man to be President who is already well on track to being a total disaster should chasten the American public. The question of why so few Americans vote is what needs to be determined. Are they just uninterested? Do they feel that it is pointless? Beyond this basic reality, the fact is that moving to the right is the kiss of death. The US is already an extremist right wing society. Most Americans have no clue that their country's political spectrum is already skewed so far to the right that the Democrats would qualify as a right wing party in most other places in the Western world. It is this bizarrely distorted understanding of politics that needs to be treated. Why are so many Americans opposed to healthcare for all? Why do they oppose affordable education? Why do so many Americans have a mercenary approach to their own society? The roots of these pathologies go very deep. The right wing skewing of the US political system is a reflection of a societal illness. Embracing the illness doesn't do anything to treat it or cure it.
9
Is it still a question of "left" and "right"?
Mr. Douthat has not discussed classic left and/or right issues but a lot of issues that are present on both sides of the fence. Some of this issues came to the left or the right more or less coincidentally. The Trump wing has raised the "job" issue - a somewhat European--style social democrat classic element that was stressed also by the Sanders wing. Neocon wing was not as interested neither a part of the Dems.
The fissures go through both parties. Same sex marriage is a problem with Evangelicals but not so much with some of the Neo Con elite. For dems its a problem because it seems to be "overstressed". Front lines go through parties and political positions.
Fissures hardly covered in the past are breaking up caused by economical and social pressure amplified by populists - and in case of the Dems by defeat not only in the presidential but also in other elections. GOP is glued together by the result of the Election but in reality they have to face similar problems.
In Europe we have to face same problems. It´s more a clashing of world views than of classic party politics or ideologies. The SPD is torn in a similar way.
The solution cannot be "more left" or "more right" I think. This classic seems to be obsolete somehow.
In any case an interim solution is required.
It´s getting feet on the ground again and giving up to see the world through the lenses of political ideology driven by wishful thinking only.
Mr. Douthat has not discussed classic left and/or right issues but a lot of issues that are present on both sides of the fence. Some of this issues came to the left or the right more or less coincidentally. The Trump wing has raised the "job" issue - a somewhat European--style social democrat classic element that was stressed also by the Sanders wing. Neocon wing was not as interested neither a part of the Dems.
The fissures go through both parties. Same sex marriage is a problem with Evangelicals but not so much with some of the Neo Con elite. For dems its a problem because it seems to be "overstressed". Front lines go through parties and political positions.
Fissures hardly covered in the past are breaking up caused by economical and social pressure amplified by populists - and in case of the Dems by defeat not only in the presidential but also in other elections. GOP is glued together by the result of the Election but in reality they have to face similar problems.
In Europe we have to face same problems. It´s more a clashing of world views than of classic party politics or ideologies. The SPD is torn in a similar way.
The solution cannot be "more left" or "more right" I think. This classic seems to be obsolete somehow.
In any case an interim solution is required.
It´s getting feet on the ground again and giving up to see the world through the lenses of political ideology driven by wishful thinking only.
1
This is the slyest bit of Republican, perhaps self-delusional propaganda I've seen in some while. It assigns positions to Democrats that have no basis in fact. For example, core Democratic principles most certainly do not include open borders and pen-stroke amnesty. (Please recall the successful implementation of the bi-partisan 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act under President Reagan.) Further, Douthat is merely adhering to the Republican playbook that for some years moved our entire political environment to the right. Moderate Republicans were reviled and punished by their own leadership and the party, as a whole, was no longer centrist. Democrats, less united than Republicans, but more willing to remain centrist, reacted in two ways. Many, though reluctant and fearful of the consequences, swung right. Others, to offer sharper distinctions and to more fully embrace the progressive mantle, moved further left.
The past campaign emphasized extreme positions as both parties tried to gauge public temperament and win support. Both parties need to recalibrate their positions. But there is no need or justification for Democrats to now be silent about core civil rights and economic issues. Such silence is tantamount to surrender to the Republicans' deliberate right-wing agenda. Such silence is a disservice to our nation.
The past campaign emphasized extreme positions as both parties tried to gauge public temperament and win support. Both parties need to recalibrate their positions. But there is no need or justification for Democrats to now be silent about core civil rights and economic issues. Such silence is tantamount to surrender to the Republicans' deliberate right-wing agenda. Such silence is a disservice to our nation.
4
Yes there was a lie, a bunch. Our fellow citizens, voting against their interests in a lot of cases, are being snookered as we speak. If Trump won by a) being an alpha male and b) by rejecting Republican dogma why would the Democrats change their understanding about the future. The big disagreement is that the average citizen still gets the shaft by someone. Income inequality, tax inequality, political influence inequality are the political problems that Trump addressed without policy proposals. Jobs are going to be a huge problem in the future. One thousand jobs in Indiana doesn't solve anything, the job market is the job market. Multiculturalism is a reality, as is intellectual and talent multi-nationalism. Global warming is real and we have to plan for it. It isn't the past or present that separates us, it is the future. If the Republican doctrine of short term profits, white preference and denial of income inequality, climate change and any opposition wisdom, is not changed, then there will be crises in the future. The Democrats were victims of a successful character assassination, a flood of disinformation, and a dissatisfaction period that the candidate didn't recognize. Their candidate was not well liked and was a woman; she lost the male vote, so do the math. What the Democrats need is some charismatic candidates and if, sad to say, Post-truth persist, either a much more vigilant press or some of their own marketing strategists to push their own lies.
2
The fact is that between Bernie Sanders' challenge to the Democratic establishment from the left and pro-worker, anti-free trade support for demagogue Trump, the country has rejected the strategy of "moving to the right" which has been in play for forty years. Polls showed that Sanders - with his support for single-payer health car, banking regulation, free public college, student-loan debt forgiveness, a $15 per hour minimum wage and diplomacy before war - could have beaten Trump; Hillary, with her pro-Wall Street stances, couldn't and didn't. Why? Because voters know the Democrats' constant rightward shift has hurt us profoundly, essentially eliminating the middle class. It began, I believe, as early as the 1970's, when Spiro Agnew was trotted out to paint middle-of-the-road Vietnam War opponents as rabid "leftists." It was amped up as Clinton embraced shipping our jobs to extremely low-wage countries on behalf of multinational corporations and banking de-regulation that led to the 2008 crash and subsequent transfer of wealth to the richest 1%. Obama's earliest appointments, Geithner and Larry Summers, were Goldman Sachs guys, and a shift to the right continued with the President keeping Guantanamo open, escalating a war in Iraq to Afghanistan and, eventually, the entire middle east. Now, salvaging or, after Trump, restoring a few marginally democratic (yes, lower case "d") programs will seem radically left wing to party insiders. Voters know better.
7
Democrats should not move anywhere near the a-factual hate spewers I regularly see comments from in the media.
There could be a measure of Liberal fatigue in the population. Act on climate change, accept gender equality, redress racial iniquities, bless gay marriage, don't pollute, recycle, preserve habitat, protect species; the list of Liberal causes is a constant demand placed upon people to alter their lifestyle and values. Nonetheless, those are all worthwhile and ultimately necessary transformations that Liberals should never give up on.
Liberals do need to re-frame those issues, and God forbid, educate those who don't get it or cannot be bothered. The rural areas where Trump received lopsided support have been experiencing a brain drain for the past several decades. Kids who want something more or different than the limited opportunities in rural areas leave and they don't come back. They are often the best and brightest. What remains is often the under-educated.
This is why the Electoral College has and will do great damage as it over-represents rural areas into a tail-wagging-the-dog situation.
There could be a measure of Liberal fatigue in the population. Act on climate change, accept gender equality, redress racial iniquities, bless gay marriage, don't pollute, recycle, preserve habitat, protect species; the list of Liberal causes is a constant demand placed upon people to alter their lifestyle and values. Nonetheless, those are all worthwhile and ultimately necessary transformations that Liberals should never give up on.
Liberals do need to re-frame those issues, and God forbid, educate those who don't get it or cannot be bothered. The rural areas where Trump received lopsided support have been experiencing a brain drain for the past several decades. Kids who want something more or different than the limited opportunities in rural areas leave and they don't come back. They are often the best and brightest. What remains is often the under-educated.
This is why the Electoral College has and will do great damage as it over-represents rural areas into a tail-wagging-the-dog situation.
7
No.
They should focus on middle and working-class economic stability (not "solidarity"): * job growth; * Keynesian spending on infrastructure now, while rates are low and labor's plentiful; * decreasing healthcare costs; * decreasing higher education costs; * stabilizing Social Security; and *reforming the tax code.
I'd also suggest easier ways to discharge medical debt without a full bankruptcy process.
These issues transcend race and heritage.
And President Obama got no help from Republicans on these issues. Their only goal was obstruction and their only tool a spanner.
Numerically, voting patterns suggest identity politics are a distraction from the core financial issues faced by voters Trump picked up.
Certainly, issues like Black Lives Matter, immigration, and gender-neutral bathrooms did not help Democrats this year, which is why the smart ones stayed away. Policing issues like harassment and discrimination are local concerns indicative of widespread toxicity, but ultimately they are state/ local government issues. Federal involvement would be rare.
In sum: class struggles, not expressly racial ones. Financial security, not identity sensitivity.
What's remarkable is that white wage-insecure voters preferred Trump the charlatan and the Republican band of merry hucksters.
That's where Clintonian neoliberalism has led the Dems. That's how far they are from working and middle class people. The people the think they're fighting for.
They should focus on middle and working-class economic stability (not "solidarity"): * job growth; * Keynesian spending on infrastructure now, while rates are low and labor's plentiful; * decreasing healthcare costs; * decreasing higher education costs; * stabilizing Social Security; and *reforming the tax code.
I'd also suggest easier ways to discharge medical debt without a full bankruptcy process.
These issues transcend race and heritage.
And President Obama got no help from Republicans on these issues. Their only goal was obstruction and their only tool a spanner.
Numerically, voting patterns suggest identity politics are a distraction from the core financial issues faced by voters Trump picked up.
Certainly, issues like Black Lives Matter, immigration, and gender-neutral bathrooms did not help Democrats this year, which is why the smart ones stayed away. Policing issues like harassment and discrimination are local concerns indicative of widespread toxicity, but ultimately they are state/ local government issues. Federal involvement would be rare.
In sum: class struggles, not expressly racial ones. Financial security, not identity sensitivity.
What's remarkable is that white wage-insecure voters preferred Trump the charlatan and the Republican band of merry hucksters.
That's where Clintonian neoliberalism has led the Dems. That's how far they are from working and middle class people. The people the think they're fighting for.
6
Dream on, Ross. One month ago, all the talk was about the disintegrating Republican Party. Now, after an election in which their candidates got well over 2 million more votes than the Republicans and made gains in the House and Senate, it's the Democrats who are in trouble? Republicans may coalesce around Trump - although this is still highly doubtful - but will this take the country in a positive direction? Democrats need to continue to fight for the programs that make America better for everyone - affordable health care for all, real educational opportunities, engaging diversity - and they need to do a better job of countering Republican voter suppression strategies and getting people to vote. Trump won this election by making promises he has already shown he has no intention of keeping. This opens up opportunities for Democrats to win back the disaffected white working class by promoting programs that truly are in their interests, while the Republicans show clearly they are in Washington only to represent the big corporations. Moving to the right will not help the Democratic Party, nor the country.
79
I completely agree with this column. I could also write the same column, with tweaks, about the Republican Party.
What the United States needs is for both parties to move to the center, and be more like the 1950s when it was almost impossible to distinguish a Democrat from a Republican.
True, the parties back then were more like *machines*, but those machines produced far more competent leaders (e.g., members of Congress) than today's ideological parties.
There used to be much more civility and compromise back in the day. That is precisely what our nation needs.
So, I am not for ending our two party system. I am for moving both parties to the center, sort of like a bell curve: the lefties and righties in each party would be few in number.
We can do this! All it takes is one small step in this direction, followed by many more small steps toward the center.
As Jesse Jackson has said many times, let's Keep Hope Alive.
What the United States needs is for both parties to move to the center, and be more like the 1950s when it was almost impossible to distinguish a Democrat from a Republican.
True, the parties back then were more like *machines*, but those machines produced far more competent leaders (e.g., members of Congress) than today's ideological parties.
There used to be much more civility and compromise back in the day. That is precisely what our nation needs.
So, I am not for ending our two party system. I am for moving both parties to the center, sort of like a bell curve: the lefties and righties in each party would be few in number.
We can do this! All it takes is one small step in this direction, followed by many more small steps toward the center.
As Jesse Jackson has said many times, let's Keep Hope Alive.
54
"We can do this! All it takes is one small step in this direction, followed by many more small steps toward the center."
Tim, nice sentiment; however, you're neglecting one factor: how to educate enough willfully ignorant people to stop voting against their best interests?
Tim, nice sentiment; however, you're neglecting one factor: how to educate enough willfully ignorant people to stop voting against their best interests?
1
The center is already skewed to the right and has been for several decades. What actually needs to be done is that everybody needs to move to the left a little while and then the left can move in towards the center. Your idea of a center government is a nostalgic one that overlooks many of the detriments to good government that we experience during the 50s and 60s like Jim Crowe and mysogyny
2
What "went wrong" had little to do with liberal ideas. It had to do with millions of clueless voters electing a slack-jawed idiot for president. Even Ross Douthat realized that the "president"-elect was a vulgar, ignorant and unelectable fool who sullied the Republican Party and didn't deserve to win. Now he says that the man is shining symbol of a new conservative world order, and that liberals should move toward the flame.
The proper response to racism, xenophobia, homophobia and misogyny is not to move toward it. We're not going to lie down with the dogs who are being elevated to important positions in this new administration. We're not going to help them return our country to the way it was in the 1950s.
Maybe Republicans are content to compromise their values and embrace building walls, destroying medical care for millions, recriminalizing abortion, denying science and trashing education. But fighting those things are what liberals stand for, and they're what made this country great.
We have a choice to make. Do we want to succumb to the disease that has affected our nation, or do we want to fight it? The decisions we make today will decide the future of this country for decades to come.
The proper response to racism, xenophobia, homophobia and misogyny is not to move toward it. We're not going to lie down with the dogs who are being elevated to important positions in this new administration. We're not going to help them return our country to the way it was in the 1950s.
Maybe Republicans are content to compromise their values and embrace building walls, destroying medical care for millions, recriminalizing abortion, denying science and trashing education. But fighting those things are what liberals stand for, and they're what made this country great.
We have a choice to make. Do we want to succumb to the disease that has affected our nation, or do we want to fight it? The decisions we make today will decide the future of this country for decades to come.
25
Whoa, Ross. You very quickly dismiss the emerging debate among Democrats about the party's future course of action in the wake of Nov. 8. That's a bit premature; not even a month has passed and you are prescribing a move to the right that would have the Democratic Party literally abandon its core support by adopting the GOP's scorched earth policies that enrich the wealthy to the detriment of everyone else.
There is a progressive path forward for Democrats anchored in environmental protections, gender equality (including reproductive rights), a single payer health insurance option, humane immigration reform and -- yes -- a tax and fiscal policy that enhances middle class lives through increased levies on obscene (and often unearned) wealth.
The Democratic weakness has been its inability to articulate a cohesive world view. But the fact that it won a majority of the Presidential vote should tell you that stronger candidates and a more cohesive policy is a much preferred way to right the ship rather than follow the GOP path down the alt-right rabbit hole.
There is a progressive path forward for Democrats anchored in environmental protections, gender equality (including reproductive rights), a single payer health insurance option, humane immigration reform and -- yes -- a tax and fiscal policy that enhances middle class lives through increased levies on obscene (and often unearned) wealth.
The Democratic weakness has been its inability to articulate a cohesive world view. But the fact that it won a majority of the Presidential vote should tell you that stronger candidates and a more cohesive policy is a much preferred way to right the ship rather than follow the GOP path down the alt-right rabbit hole.
85
Yes. Had the Democratic Party and the corporate media - comprised of corporate Democrats in the mold of the Clintons - not titled the playing field during the primary we would have president-elect Sanders. He was a far stronger candidate for the general election as virtually every poll taken during and after the primary showed. He was the only person who consistently beat Trumpand by double digits - no margin of error would have change it.
But the same "very serious people", as they are called by an insider who should know, already determined that it was Hillary's turn. She had not raised buckets of money for the DNC all those years without expecting a payback, and she was going to get it any way possible.
You want to blame someone? Blame the DNC and the media who colluded with them to shut out coverage of Sanders. What don't you get about the fact that Hillary was roundly hated and distrusted by a large number of voters and she is a weak candidate, anyway?
There will be no movement right. We tried that with Bill Clinton and have done it ever since. Being Republican "lite" will not bring back the base. They didn't vote for Trump because for his social policies. They vote for him because he wasn't the usual Republican cadidate. They want him to shake those folks up.
The country wants another FDR. They have been voting in hopes of finding one since 2008. Both Obama, and now Trump, ran on changing the status quo, not perserving it. The GOP isn't as strong as you think.
But the same "very serious people", as they are called by an insider who should know, already determined that it was Hillary's turn. She had not raised buckets of money for the DNC all those years without expecting a payback, and she was going to get it any way possible.
You want to blame someone? Blame the DNC and the media who colluded with them to shut out coverage of Sanders. What don't you get about the fact that Hillary was roundly hated and distrusted by a large number of voters and she is a weak candidate, anyway?
There will be no movement right. We tried that with Bill Clinton and have done it ever since. Being Republican "lite" will not bring back the base. They didn't vote for Trump because for his social policies. They vote for him because he wasn't the usual Republican cadidate. They want him to shake those folks up.
The country wants another FDR. They have been voting in hopes of finding one since 2008. Both Obama, and now Trump, ran on changing the status quo, not perserving it. The GOP isn't as strong as you think.
1
So what it's all about is winning? It's all right to toss aside deeply held beliefs in order to win?
Compromise is always necessary, of course. (Although the obstructionist Republicans don't seem to believe that.) But there are certain ideals that it is wrong to let go of just in order to win. Besides, how seriously should we take candidates who passionately defend their ideals and then make a 180 after an election loss? What is really in their hearts?
The Democrats don't have to move to the right. They need to educate the population in a non-condescending way so that we understand why deregulation, why worshipping profit over real prosperity, has not worked for most of us. They need to point out that allowing discrimination against some groups could very well make discrimination of just about any group the new normal. They need to drop the attitude that those who don't agree with them are deplorable and instead make a case for why certain behaviors are deplorable. And they have to then act on what they say rather than compromising so much that they reinforce the belief that there's no point in voting because all politicians are the same.
Compromise is always necessary, of course. (Although the obstructionist Republicans don't seem to believe that.) But there are certain ideals that it is wrong to let go of just in order to win. Besides, how seriously should we take candidates who passionately defend their ideals and then make a 180 after an election loss? What is really in their hearts?
The Democrats don't have to move to the right. They need to educate the population in a non-condescending way so that we understand why deregulation, why worshipping profit over real prosperity, has not worked for most of us. They need to point out that allowing discrimination against some groups could very well make discrimination of just about any group the new normal. They need to drop the attitude that those who don't agree with them are deplorable and instead make a case for why certain behaviors are deplorable. And they have to then act on what they say rather than compromising so much that they reinforce the belief that there's no point in voting because all politicians are the same.
6
Are we still pretending that Trump won (the Electoral college) because of "economic solidarity" with the distressed working class and that Hillary lost (except for, by millions, the popular vote) because she focused on identity politics?
As Michelle Obama said and Hillary often repeated , "When they go low, we go high". The truth is Trump went lower than anyone thought possible and millions upon millions of people saw their lower selves reflected in him and voted accordingly -- the ultimate identity politics.
The difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is stark; inclusion vs. exclusion, the common wealth against unfettered individual acquisitiveness, good will against fear, social evolution against reactionary policy.
Your prescription isn't actually for the Democratic party to tack to the right, it's for them to join the Republicans in pandering to our citizens' lower animal. That isn't going to happen.
As for "demographic triumphalism"; it isn't simply demographic changes that the Republican party has to fear, it's the evolution of human awareness. As MLK said, "“The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice.”
Your side had a temporary victory but that doesn't change the fact that you're dinosaurs -- and there's an extinction level event at some point in your future. The sooner that happens the better for humanity.
As Michelle Obama said and Hillary often repeated , "When they go low, we go high". The truth is Trump went lower than anyone thought possible and millions upon millions of people saw their lower selves reflected in him and voted accordingly -- the ultimate identity politics.
The difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is stark; inclusion vs. exclusion, the common wealth against unfettered individual acquisitiveness, good will against fear, social evolution against reactionary policy.
Your prescription isn't actually for the Democratic party to tack to the right, it's for them to join the Republicans in pandering to our citizens' lower animal. That isn't going to happen.
As for "demographic triumphalism"; it isn't simply demographic changes that the Republican party has to fear, it's the evolution of human awareness. As MLK said, "“The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice.”
Your side had a temporary victory but that doesn't change the fact that you're dinosaurs -- and there's an extinction level event at some point in your future. The sooner that happens the better for humanity.
381
Mr. Tragoes, I thank you for your brilliant analysis and your reasoned defense of liberalism. Inclusion and moving forward was what John Lennon was all about. "Come together," he sad. But I digress. Again, thank you for renewing my hope.
3
You are expecting too much of humans. Humans after all are mere mortals. The way the Democrats are currently stressing identity politics is a very big turn off for many of us. If the Democrats continue doing this, I suspect more and more of the population will get turned off over time.
Short answer, no. Nor did Trump move to the center. His supposedly centrist position on entitlements has already been unmasked by his choice of hard-liners for the cabinet. Together with Ryan, they seek to undermine Medicare, among other things for which they did not have a mandate. And let's see where Trump ends up on trade, after the impact on big business concerns is properly explained to him.
As far as so called identity politics? The leftist ideals of a melting pot where citizens were considered equal under the law, where we protect civil rights under our constitution, where we might disagree on how to fix things but we agree on the problems, where we insist on civil discourse, where we agree that so-called "white-nationalism" (Bannon's media brand of nazism dressed up in middle class clothes) is an abomination. That's where solidarity comes from, from shared ideals and most of all a shared truth. When you undermine the truth by lying again and again we no longer occupy a shared reality. That is how societies fracture.
Those "liberal" ideas used to be our shared ideals. They were our national brand. So no, Ross, we won't be moving right. We won't be joining you in your march toward corporate rule and social Darwinism, helped along by voter suppression laws that overwhelmingly target the poor and people of color. No Ross, now, more than ever, we will fight for the ideals that other nations once admired.
As far as so called identity politics? The leftist ideals of a melting pot where citizens were considered equal under the law, where we protect civil rights under our constitution, where we might disagree on how to fix things but we agree on the problems, where we insist on civil discourse, where we agree that so-called "white-nationalism" (Bannon's media brand of nazism dressed up in middle class clothes) is an abomination. That's where solidarity comes from, from shared ideals and most of all a shared truth. When you undermine the truth by lying again and again we no longer occupy a shared reality. That is how societies fracture.
Those "liberal" ideas used to be our shared ideals. They were our national brand. So no, Ross, we won't be moving right. We won't be joining you in your march toward corporate rule and social Darwinism, helped along by voter suppression laws that overwhelmingly target the poor and people of color. No Ross, now, more than ever, we will fight for the ideals that other nations once admired.
283
What I find curious is this insistence that Democrats lost because of "identity politics" when the very center of Trump's campaign was the use of identity politics: "uneducated" white men. What people are calling identity politics is the effort of the Democratic Party to give dignity to every group that is excluded or discriminated. The party that is willing to remove health care for the poor on the "higher importance" of freedom to choose, is now criticizing the Democrats' effort to give personal dignity the importance it deserves. And I don't see that the Party is in such straits. If you win the popular vote by nearly 3 million votes and if you lose the electoral vote by the slimmest of margins: turning 5,000 votes would have won Michigan ;10,000 in Wisconsin;; 35,000 in Pennsylvania. More robust campaigning in rural areas or more extensive vote turn out would have changed the results. Clinton's campaign stressed improvement for all segments of the population while Trump concentrated on the people who have been hurt by globalization and automation, promising them things that he cannot bring about.
And, by the way, if Carrier gives in on not moving to Mexico, it is due to the fact that it also builds many items for the defense industry, and there Trump can exact his revenge. Carrier has decided not to risk losing those contracts.
And, by the way, if Carrier gives in on not moving to Mexico, it is due to the fact that it also builds many items for the defense industry, and there Trump can exact his revenge. Carrier has decided not to risk losing those contracts.
14
Donald Trump's Electoral College victory is too multi-layered to adequately dissect here, but one category where Trump outplayed the Madam Secretary was his effective appeal to 'the forgotten man' that FDR appealed to in his 1932 election campaign.
As FDR said in 1932, “these unhappy times call for the building of plans that rest upon the forgotten, the unorganized but the indispensable units of economic power… that build from the bottom up and not from the top down, that put their faith once more in the forgotten man at the bottom of the economic pyramid.”
DJT is no FDR, of course, but people do ultimately vote for 'jobs' and with their selfish wallets, and Trump directly appealed to that instinct....AND to his voter base's deplorable White Wonder Bread Society instincts.
Trump's Presidency will be aided with a massive infrastructure bill that the Just-Say-No-Whites-R-Us-Party-First-Republican Congress denied to the Democratic, pigmentally-challenged President Obama.
Trump may even save a few manufacturing jobs, but he will not defeat the tides of globalization and modernity.
When Republicans regress to 'free-market' extortionist health care policy, voucherized healthcare and public schools, massive 0.1% tax cut welfare and a deregulated Robber Baron-Wall St. vulture capitalism that presses its boot down even harder on the throats of Americans and re-collapse the economy, the Democratic sun will rise again.
Democrats will always have GOP self-destruction on their side.
As FDR said in 1932, “these unhappy times call for the building of plans that rest upon the forgotten, the unorganized but the indispensable units of economic power… that build from the bottom up and not from the top down, that put their faith once more in the forgotten man at the bottom of the economic pyramid.”
DJT is no FDR, of course, but people do ultimately vote for 'jobs' and with their selfish wallets, and Trump directly appealed to that instinct....AND to his voter base's deplorable White Wonder Bread Society instincts.
Trump's Presidency will be aided with a massive infrastructure bill that the Just-Say-No-Whites-R-Us-Party-First-Republican Congress denied to the Democratic, pigmentally-challenged President Obama.
Trump may even save a few manufacturing jobs, but he will not defeat the tides of globalization and modernity.
When Republicans regress to 'free-market' extortionist health care policy, voucherized healthcare and public schools, massive 0.1% tax cut welfare and a deregulated Robber Baron-Wall St. vulture capitalism that presses its boot down even harder on the throats of Americans and re-collapse the economy, the Democratic sun will rise again.
Democrats will always have GOP self-destruction on their side.
136
Really? Move right? Didn't you notice how the progressives deserted Clinton? The Democrat Party needs to move LEFT. The election would have been won by Bernie Sanders. Instead the Democrat establishment chose Clinton well in advance and then forced their choice on the people through chicanery and fraud. The whole country is paying a terrible price. Imagine how different things would be now, if Sanders had at least gotten fair media coverage. So no, the Democrats should not move right, but the question is can they. Of course they can..been moving that way for thirty years. There has been no "leftward drift under Obama". Obama snatched defeat from the jaws of victory for progressive causes over and over, from scuttling the public option to deep sixing our civil rights under the guise of national security. I am not impressed.
47
Sanders could not have won for several reasons:
1. The GOP never attacked him. Had he won the nomination, they would have easily caricatured him as the second coming of Josef Stalin.
2. He is not a Democrat; he is an Independent Socialist who caucuses with the democrats. The party owes him no support. He has never supported other Democrats running for office.
3. If he had gotten the nomination, Michael Bloomberg would have run as a 3rd party candidate, which would have split the Liberal vote, easily allowing Trump to win. I realize Bloomberg got elected Mayor as a Republican, but I can't imaging too many conservatives voting for him based on his social liberalism, nanny stateism (soda bans) and strong opposition to gun rights. He is probably the most high profile anti-gun politician in the country today.
Under Obama the Democrats went to the right on Fracking. That's about it.
1. The GOP never attacked him. Had he won the nomination, they would have easily caricatured him as the second coming of Josef Stalin.
2. He is not a Democrat; he is an Independent Socialist who caucuses with the democrats. The party owes him no support. He has never supported other Democrats running for office.
3. If he had gotten the nomination, Michael Bloomberg would have run as a 3rd party candidate, which would have split the Liberal vote, easily allowing Trump to win. I realize Bloomberg got elected Mayor as a Republican, but I can't imaging too many conservatives voting for him based on his social liberalism, nanny stateism (soda bans) and strong opposition to gun rights. He is probably the most high profile anti-gun politician in the country today.
Under Obama the Democrats went to the right on Fracking. That's about it.
3
Interesting that hard right columnists encourage Dems to move center right.
One can also argue that the Democrats, in the recent election, didn't articulate their support for the American worker. Tim Ryan, trying to upset Mrs. Pelosi, has made precisely that point: the Dems must return to the party of labor, and leave the fancy Hollywood stars behind.
But I'm not sure that optics alone can regain the support of the American worker, one who used to vote reliably blue. There has to be a reinforced effort to drive home a message over the failure of the GOP to deliver on economic promises.
Already, the new administration has made cabinet picks that are hardly comforting for the middle class: an HHS secretary itching to turn healthcare loose on the open market, and change the rules for Medicare; a treasury secretary (and vulture capitalist) whose resume includes throwing a lot of mortgage holders out of their homes; rumors of killing Dodd-Frank and thus inciting bankers to go back to speculation; and an attorney general whose attitudes toward voting rights is abdominal; and threats to topple the Consumer Protection Agency that curbed potential banking frauds.
On paper, things don't look good for American workers no matter what Trump says about "saving" 1000 jobs in Indiana (with 1000 leaving), or how much he claims to be for the worker.
I see vast openings for Dems to reclaim their mantle of worker protection in the days and years ahead--without moving hard right.
One can also argue that the Democrats, in the recent election, didn't articulate their support for the American worker. Tim Ryan, trying to upset Mrs. Pelosi, has made precisely that point: the Dems must return to the party of labor, and leave the fancy Hollywood stars behind.
But I'm not sure that optics alone can regain the support of the American worker, one who used to vote reliably blue. There has to be a reinforced effort to drive home a message over the failure of the GOP to deliver on economic promises.
Already, the new administration has made cabinet picks that are hardly comforting for the middle class: an HHS secretary itching to turn healthcare loose on the open market, and change the rules for Medicare; a treasury secretary (and vulture capitalist) whose resume includes throwing a lot of mortgage holders out of their homes; rumors of killing Dodd-Frank and thus inciting bankers to go back to speculation; and an attorney general whose attitudes toward voting rights is abdominal; and threats to topple the Consumer Protection Agency that curbed potential banking frauds.
On paper, things don't look good for American workers no matter what Trump says about "saving" 1000 jobs in Indiana (with 1000 leaving), or how much he claims to be for the worker.
I see vast openings for Dems to reclaim their mantle of worker protection in the days and years ahead--without moving hard right.
64
"and an attorney general whose attitudes toward voting rights is abdominal"
I think you meant abominable here, Christine, but my stomach has been feeling pretty queasy as Trump's picks are announced so it could be both ! ;->
I think you meant abominable here, Christine, but my stomach has been feeling pretty queasy as Trump's picks are announced so it could be both ! ;->
5
Agreed. But the Banks are already in rampant speculation. So too are the major corporations who have billions to spare--like Apple and Walmart. That scenario in worse now than it was in 2006-2007.
1
Mr. Douthat mixes up many different issues.
The Democrats did not suffer a big defeat.
Yes Trump won the electoral vote and he is rightfully the President elect.
But HRC won the popular vote by over 1 m votes.
The Dems picked up 2 Senate seat and some House seats.
The Dems lost the Presidential race because HRC ran on a platform of elect me I'm a woman.
She had no program to help laid off and displaced workers.
Telling coal miners to become call center operators at a fraction of their previous wage is not a program.
So HRC lost Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan , Wisconsin.
Trump successfully peddled his snake oil but he has no program either.
The Dems should not move rightward.
They need to develop programs to help these workers.
The Dems need to fight destruction of Social Security and Medicare.
The nomination of Price as Secy. HHS. is an ominous sign.
Trump appears to be reneging [typical behavior] on his promise not to cut these two programs.
The question of bathrooms and providing birth control or catering gay weddings is separate from the main questions of economic issues.
The Democrats did not suffer a big defeat.
Yes Trump won the electoral vote and he is rightfully the President elect.
But HRC won the popular vote by over 1 m votes.
The Dems picked up 2 Senate seat and some House seats.
The Dems lost the Presidential race because HRC ran on a platform of elect me I'm a woman.
She had no program to help laid off and displaced workers.
Telling coal miners to become call center operators at a fraction of their previous wage is not a program.
So HRC lost Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan , Wisconsin.
Trump successfully peddled his snake oil but he has no program either.
The Dems should not move rightward.
They need to develop programs to help these workers.
The Dems need to fight destruction of Social Security and Medicare.
The nomination of Price as Secy. HHS. is an ominous sign.
Trump appears to be reneging [typical behavior] on his promise not to cut these two programs.
The question of bathrooms and providing birth control or catering gay weddings is separate from the main questions of economic issues.
33
Honestly, David, is that all you heard through the media Trump-fest noise? I'm a woman, elect me? She had loads of programs that would have helped the white men who rejected her FOR being a woman. Serves them right, but what about the rest of us?
This blame other people for everything spleen that white men have been displaying lately to make perfectly clear how much they dislike competing with the rest of the population will not improve their situations. That ship has sailed.
Entitlement is ugly to behold. You have at least 4 years to think about that while the ugliness destroys anything it can.
Donald Trump to USA: I'm Ghengis Kahn! Elect me! And 46% of the population thought that was a dandy idea. Just don't call yourselves patriots. Likelier, you are the ugly 47% Mitt Romney pointed out in his private speech.
(Did anyone in the media ask him to supply a transcript of his remarks?) No, didn't think so. We reserve that kind of treatment for the ladies in this country...along with trans vaginal ultrasounds. And David, birth control and bathrooms were only on republican minds.
Pucker up, buttercup, they have the keys to the castle now. Good job, America! You avoided a female president! Instead we have he truly histrionic Donald. Now let's see how that works out for you. And for the rest of us who don't count to David except as "programs" that don't matter to him.
This blame other people for everything spleen that white men have been displaying lately to make perfectly clear how much they dislike competing with the rest of the population will not improve their situations. That ship has sailed.
Entitlement is ugly to behold. You have at least 4 years to think about that while the ugliness destroys anything it can.
Donald Trump to USA: I'm Ghengis Kahn! Elect me! And 46% of the population thought that was a dandy idea. Just don't call yourselves patriots. Likelier, you are the ugly 47% Mitt Romney pointed out in his private speech.
(Did anyone in the media ask him to supply a transcript of his remarks?) No, didn't think so. We reserve that kind of treatment for the ladies in this country...along with trans vaginal ultrasounds. And David, birth control and bathrooms were only on republican minds.
Pucker up, buttercup, they have the keys to the castle now. Good job, America! You avoided a female president! Instead we have he truly histrionic Donald. Now let's see how that works out for you. And for the rest of us who don't count to David except as "programs" that don't matter to him.
1
The political spectrum now goes all the way from center-right to far-right. Why would the Dems want to move even further right?
The irony is that trump won only by courting the Dems' natural base, blue collar workers. If the Dems had gone after them instead of ignoring them in favor of trying to win moderate Republicans (in vain), we would have had President-elect Clinton.
The irony is that trump won only by courting the Dems' natural base, blue collar workers. If the Dems had gone after them instead of ignoring them in favor of trying to win moderate Republicans (in vain), we would have had President-elect Clinton.
50
Bernie is a Democrat. Hillary, a Democrat in name only, is what Republicans were when I was growing up in the 1950s and 1960s. Trump is so far to the right of Republicans that he's a fascist.
The Democratic party must move left, to reclaim itself and the working people who depend on it to protect us against fascism.
The Democratic party must move left, to reclaim itself and the working people who depend on it to protect us against fascism.
145
@M. L. Chadwick: Wrong right out of the box. Bernie isn't a Democrat. If he would deign to register as a member of the party, maybe more of us would listen to him.
3
There is no reason for Dems to move right. There are many other non-white, non-Christian groups out there that have yet to be tapped.
For example, the video gaming community has long suffered from name-calling by bullies. They are screaming to be their own protected class. This group is estimated to number around 10 million - with another 50 million coming on-line in the next decade.
I hear the Dems are already speaking with Gaming-Americans in preparation for 2020.
For example, the video gaming community has long suffered from name-calling by bullies. They are screaming to be their own protected class. This group is estimated to number around 10 million - with another 50 million coming on-line in the next decade.
I hear the Dems are already speaking with Gaming-Americans in preparation for 2020.
12
That's funny, but not a bad idea.
Democrats certainly don't have to "move to the right"
As demonstrated by the numbers, the majority of voters support the Democrats agenda.
That's's why Republicans have to suppress votes, gerrymander (so that Democrats can lose the House even when they get 1 million more votes than the Republicans), and distract with email email Benghazi email email rather than engage in a serious discussion of policy.
When asked about specific polices, the majority favor what the Democrats support (raising the minimum wage, universal background checks, increased taxes for the wealthy-- including an Estate tax for the 5000 wealthiest--infrastructure investment, available, affordable healthcare, investments in public health, protection of their air and water...even many of your " culture war" items such as keeping the government out of family decisions such as whom you marry, and freedom of religion).
The Democrats' problem is not policy. It is how to communicate that policy when the media prefers to cover sound bites, now tweets, and angry attacks rather than substantive descriptions of solutions to our challenges.
As demonstrated by the numbers, the majority of voters support the Democrats agenda.
That's's why Republicans have to suppress votes, gerrymander (so that Democrats can lose the House even when they get 1 million more votes than the Republicans), and distract with email email Benghazi email email rather than engage in a serious discussion of policy.
When asked about specific polices, the majority favor what the Democrats support (raising the minimum wage, universal background checks, increased taxes for the wealthy-- including an Estate tax for the 5000 wealthiest--infrastructure investment, available, affordable healthcare, investments in public health, protection of their air and water...even many of your " culture war" items such as keeping the government out of family decisions such as whom you marry, and freedom of religion).
The Democrats' problem is not policy. It is how to communicate that policy when the media prefers to cover sound bites, now tweets, and angry attacks rather than substantive descriptions of solutions to our challenges.
204
The problem is how to communicate that policy when the cold-war phobia of red-baiting is deep under your skin. I'm sort of hoping the "Democratic Socialist" Sanders has succeeded in breaking the taboo against saying right out loud that you're against feudalism -- now to see whether anyone younger wants to use the rhetorical territory he has won.
1
ABC gave Sanders approx. 10 seconds of story time during the entire year, according to Sanders on Amy Goodman last night. T rump got huge air time. The republicans even have their own TV/propaganda network which is 24/7 lies and distortion of anything and everything democratic.
Perhaps Douthat should have read the companion piece in today's issue: The Evangelicalism of White Men is Dead.
Republicans are going to have free range the next couple of years and I have no doubt that they will find a way to prove, once again, that they really are not the party of the middle class. And this time I think the middle class will be more inclined to pay attention.
Perhaps Douthat should have read the companion piece in today's issue: The Evangelicalism of White Men is Dead.
Republicans are going to have free range the next couple of years and I have no doubt that they will find a way to prove, once again, that they really are not the party of the middle class. And this time I think the middle class will be more inclined to pay attention.
2
OR, Dems could work to reverse the egregious gerrymandering which has produced the radical rightist House of Representatives since 2010, leading to the obstruction/constipation in D.C. that GOP'ers calculated would so frustrate voters that Obama would get blamed instead of GOP'ers:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/tom-perriello-obama_us_5741df1de4b06...
Helping along such an effort would be a return to the 50-state strategy of Gov. Howard Dean when he chaired the DNC, accompanied by a funding initiative for down ballot state Dem efforts on par with the Koch clan's initiatives for GOP'ers.
After all, the Democratic message in 2016 won House seats away from Republicans, won Senate seats away from Republicans, and attracted almost 3 million more popular votes for the White House - plus, only 1 election out of the last 7 has had a GOP'er win the popular vote for the White House, and Dems almost pulled off the hat trick this year of the same party winning the White House in the electoral college 3 terms in a row for only the 2nd time in 70 years (other time was GOP'ers in 1988).
All in all, not so bad.
Dems just need a 50-state strategy, fairly drawn Congressional district lines so that the House can actually do something (GOP'ers can't even pass their own budgets, with GOP'ers Ryan and McConnell in control) and Obama was right that 789 campaign field offices will produce better results in Presidential elections than 489 field offices.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/tom-perriello-obama_us_5741df1de4b06...
Helping along such an effort would be a return to the 50-state strategy of Gov. Howard Dean when he chaired the DNC, accompanied by a funding initiative for down ballot state Dem efforts on par with the Koch clan's initiatives for GOP'ers.
After all, the Democratic message in 2016 won House seats away from Republicans, won Senate seats away from Republicans, and attracted almost 3 million more popular votes for the White House - plus, only 1 election out of the last 7 has had a GOP'er win the popular vote for the White House, and Dems almost pulled off the hat trick this year of the same party winning the White House in the electoral college 3 terms in a row for only the 2nd time in 70 years (other time was GOP'ers in 1988).
All in all, not so bad.
Dems just need a 50-state strategy, fairly drawn Congressional district lines so that the House can actually do something (GOP'ers can't even pass their own budgets, with GOP'ers Ryan and McConnell in control) and Obama was right that 789 campaign field offices will produce better results in Presidential elections than 489 field offices.
111
Finishing our thought past the 1500 character limit:
Quickest of all would be getting more states to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact
making the Electoral College moot, since it's been so perverted by the 2-party system away from the Founders' intent:
http://www.salon.com/2016/11/28/a-perversion-227-years-in-the-making-don...
Then, our votes every 4 years on the second Tuesday in November would be like all our other elections where majority rules - same as all other Western democracies, same as our votes for Senator, Representative, Governor, Mayor, City Council, PTA president, class president, etc., etc.
Were there no electoral college intervening, there would not have been a Bush 41, nor now, Don the Con.
Dems aren't looking nearly as bad as Douthat portrays, a portrayal which is a rehash of GOP'er tactics leading into the 2010 mid-terms; but this time, there aren't any fake Tea Party groups to be ginned up by old St. Ronnie operatives like Sal Russo, as reported by NYTimes (not linking, since only 2 links allowed per post).
Quickest of all would be getting more states to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact
making the Electoral College moot, since it's been so perverted by the 2-party system away from the Founders' intent:
http://www.salon.com/2016/11/28/a-perversion-227-years-in-the-making-don...
Then, our votes every 4 years on the second Tuesday in November would be like all our other elections where majority rules - same as all other Western democracies, same as our votes for Senator, Representative, Governor, Mayor, City Council, PTA president, class president, etc., etc.
Were there no electoral college intervening, there would not have been a Bush 41, nor now, Don the Con.
Dems aren't looking nearly as bad as Douthat portrays, a portrayal which is a rehash of GOP'er tactics leading into the 2010 mid-terms; but this time, there aren't any fake Tea Party groups to be ginned up by old St. Ronnie operatives like Sal Russo, as reported by NYTimes (not linking, since only 2 links allowed per post).
9
I see Ross repeats some of the same patently false memes used in the Trump campaign. Let's start with the Trumpian backlash against liberalism in white working-class communities was associated with welfare programs — disability rolls, food stamps, Medicaid. Over 90% of so called entitlement benefits such as Medicaid and food stamps goes to the elderly, the disabled and working people. That is precisely why Democrats and any compassionate person should continue to fight for the safety net. If youhave a problem with disability claims, that is a problem for the law defining disability, not the programs that serve them. Second, no democrat I know has proposed open borders for immigration (and neither did Hillary or Sanders). The entire transgender issue can be boiled down to a single sentence. Do all Americans of any gender have equal rights? The bathroom debate, even in North Carolina, was a diversion from this basic question. North Carolina's law (as well as many other conservative states) went far beyond just bathrooms and legalized discrimination against transgender persons (as well as many other small groups). The compassionless soul of conservative governance and the 30 years war by the religious right to enshrine their particular code into public law is the real problem.
215
Like most mainstream Americans, Douthat makes a distinction between EARNED benefits - Medicare and Social Security - and non earned benefits like Medicaid, Food Stamps, welfare. Most Americans do NOT want cuts to earned benefits, since they ARE earned, but object to indiscriminate spending on non earned benefits. He also references the Dems' perceived snubbing or demonizing of police officers, who represent the only protection average Americans have against violent crime, which clearly IS increasing. I agree with Douthat that the Dems' stance on this hurt them on Nov 8. Also, I don't see why requesting some sort of border enforcement equals fascism and repression. Most other countries have MUCH more stringent border controls than the US does, and the US already takes in many more immigrants than any other country in the world. But quite a few of my Emma Lazurus/John Lennon quoting friends have lost touch with reality on this and previously mentioned subjects.
3
Amen, the compassionless soul of conservative governance is the reason many of their voters vote for the Republicans. These voters don't want anyone to benefit from their "hard earned' tax dollars. Unless, of course, someone in their family needs disability benefits, food stamps, or Medicaid. Then, they line up at the government trough just like those lesser citizens.
10
"Over 90% of so called entitlement benefits such as Medicaid and food stamps goes to the elderly, the disabled and working people." far more Whites benefit from so called entitlements than all other ethnic groups with 17.8 million whites receiving benefits. They are neglected in all arguments about entitlements. They will suffer from what most white supremacists like to describe as a racial/ethnic exploitation. Democrats must inform the public that this is an attack on poor whites, disabled whites, elderly whites, and white children or the Republicans will continue to exploit the resentment that they have created among white Americans.
6
I have long described myself as a moderate liberal with a strong practical streak. That said, as I read your proposals, I kept thinking about the unyielding positions of those on the right. For example - abortion and choice. I had a conversation with a relative on the holiday, which went like this
Her: Clinton is pro-abortion.
ME: Well, she is pro-choice
Her: same thing
ME It's not, but let's not have that fight.
We moved on. That said, I am pro-choice, but find abortion a complex topic and difficult. I am not comfortable with it; would likely never have one myself, and would like to see more done to help women avoid that option (mental health care, support in raising that child, etc.). Still, I don't want the gov't making that choice for a woman. I could find some common ground with the anti-choice folks, some things to work on, HOWEVER, when their position is that pro-choice = pro-abortion, I'm done.
Similarly, their push to pass laws legitimizing discrimination based upon religious beliefs is extremely troubling. I have many gay friends and acquaintances as well as a trans relative. Not only do such laws legalize treating them as second class citizens, but they also are a slippery slope. Can an employer who believes that the bible says a woman's place is in the home, refuse to employ women? Once we say you can hire, fire, or serve based upon your beliefs, equal rights are out the window.
Her: Clinton is pro-abortion.
ME: Well, she is pro-choice
Her: same thing
ME It's not, but let's not have that fight.
We moved on. That said, I am pro-choice, but find abortion a complex topic and difficult. I am not comfortable with it; would likely never have one myself, and would like to see more done to help women avoid that option (mental health care, support in raising that child, etc.). Still, I don't want the gov't making that choice for a woman. I could find some common ground with the anti-choice folks, some things to work on, HOWEVER, when their position is that pro-choice = pro-abortion, I'm done.
Similarly, their push to pass laws legitimizing discrimination based upon religious beliefs is extremely troubling. I have many gay friends and acquaintances as well as a trans relative. Not only do such laws legalize treating them as second class citizens, but they also are a slippery slope. Can an employer who believes that the bible says a woman's place is in the home, refuse to employ women? Once we say you can hire, fire, or serve based upon your beliefs, equal rights are out the window.
350
Abortion (for or against) is a loser issue. You won't change any minds or votes on it. So is guns---people's minds are made up. Talk about bread and butter and jobs, and act on those issues. Talk about help for the actual needy, with actual real-life examples of inadequate welfare, intolerant public housing rules, the requirement for poor people to go here and there without adequate transportation and care for kids when needed, a million issues no candidate said anything significant about in the presidential campaign. Talk about idiot laws and courts that will and do lock people up for being in debt, failing to make payments because they can't afford, because they have no income, etc, etc. Democrats need to look out for people with real needs, not get involved in stupid issues like gay rights and bathrooms.
19
How is it that human rights is a "stupid issue" and not a "real need"?
8
With all due respect, your letter typifies the problem. You talk about the "unyielding" right, yet YOU stop the conversation with your relative as soon as she says something you don't agree with. As an example, if you were against the death penalty, you wouldn't leave it up to judges to choose whether or not to apply it, would you? To argue for choice, you NEED to be able to argue for the legitimacy of the act of abortion itself.
Same with "laws legitimizing discrimination". Is that formulation any less reductive than equating pro-choice with pro-abortion?
Same with "laws legitimizing discrimination". Is that formulation any less reductive than equating pro-choice with pro-abortion?
2
No, Ross.
Why would the Democrats push a watered-down version of right-wing faux populist fascism when they can get the real thing from Trump and his ilk?
Why would the Democrats push a watered-down version of right-wing faux populist fascism when they can get the real thing from Trump and his ilk?
265
Hear, hear!!
2
Embracing the idea, e.g. that if you are in the country illegally, i.e. without the legal right to be here, you can be made to leave, is not the equivalent of fascism. Saying it is perpetuates the problem and keeps Dems away from a solution. It might be considered a nod to the rule of law. What's wrong with endorsing the rule of law? Democrats might wisely consider doing that. It is the alternative - rushing to protect the presence of undocumented aliens, that makes rational people wonder whose side you're on.
5
Wow. Centrist positions are right-wing faux populist fascism? Let's hope you don't represent the rank and file of the Democratic Party or it will be out in the wilderness for many years.
1
We don't need to move right. We need to communicate better the differences between Democrats and Republicans. Like the fact that Democrats promote the interests of ordinary Americans more consistently than does the GOP. Take healthcare. LBJ knew insurance companies were not going to cover older Americans affordably. So he created Medicare. It's worked very well. Lower cost better coverage. Next the Democrats try to extend the protection of Medicare but in a more market based setting, insurance from health insurance carriers, with the ACA to get GOP agreement. It's been an awful compromise. We need to allow younger Americans to buy Medicare coverage and just let the insurance companies compete. Or offer upgrades which are sold to those who can afford the instant hip replacement for example. Note however the GOP has done nothing. Nothing. This alone shows how and why the Democrats are better for the middle class, which includes me.
218
I couldn't agree more regarding the argument you are making regards to economic and Medicare xcetera. That is why Hillary got my vote. However Hillary did not make that her centerpiece of her campaign. She made the centerpiece of her campaign supporting undocumented immigrants and groups like BLM. That is what mattered more to many white Democrats. She thought she could pull it off with their votes. She thought wrong and it cost her.
During the debate in Miami with Bernie Sanders, Mr. Ramos backed her into a corner by making her promise that she will "not deport one undocumented immigrant as long as they did not committ a violent crime." And the rioters and looters in Charlotte certainly weren't Republican voters. And the misinformed Democratic voter didn't put our argument first which will affect them more personally and in all fairness you can't blame them. That is it in a nutshell.
During the debate in Miami with Bernie Sanders, Mr. Ramos backed her into a corner by making her promise that she will "not deport one undocumented immigrant as long as they did not committ a violent crime." And the rioters and looters in Charlotte certainly weren't Republican voters. And the misinformed Democratic voter didn't put our argument first which will affect them more personally and in all fairness you can't blame them. That is it in a nutshell.
We need to inform the public that Trump lied his way into office, threatens all of the freedoms, rights, and protections enshrined in our Constitution. When is it ever appropriate to become more sympathetic with the rich fascists?
5
"Over 90% of so called entitlement benefits such as Medicaid and food stamps goes to the elderly, the disabled and working people." far more Whites benefit from so called entitlements than all other ethnic groups with 17.8 million whites receiving benefits. They are neglected in all arguments about entitlements. They will suffer from what most white supremacists like to describe as a racial/ethnic exploitation.
2
I agree with the practical advice, but not the language and conceptualization. It assumes that left-right spectrum is solely cultural and is mislabelled itself. The "left" in culture are the values of the upper class--that is, it is really right-wing.
The grossly exaggerated racism charge against the white working class is a divide and conquer strategy to keep the minority working class from uniting with whites in promoting their economic interests. It is an extreme right wing strategy.
What the Democrats need to do is move to the left both on economic and cultural questions. The low and middle class minorities have the same cultural values as whites of similar income. The Democrats should appeal to them both in their cultural values. That is not to be labelled right as done here.
The grossly exaggerated racism charge against the white working class is a divide and conquer strategy to keep the minority working class from uniting with whites in promoting their economic interests. It is an extreme right wing strategy.
What the Democrats need to do is move to the left both on economic and cultural questions. The low and middle class minorities have the same cultural values as whites of similar income. The Democrats should appeal to them both in their cultural values. That is not to be labelled right as done here.
19
Ross, you ignore the single issue that could revive and grow the Democrats--a focus on the economy and jobs.
75
I think Douthat is saying the Dems themselves ignored that issue. The chose to focus on transgender rights and abortion, how oppressed Beyonce is and how evil the cops are. That pitch didn't sell everywhere.
5
All evidence points to liberals doubling down and moving further left.
And I disagree with your characterization of identity politics vs. economic solidarity. The former is the means of achieving the latter. To drop identity politics would mean selling economic solidarity on its own merits. While there is very strong case for government to encourage a more efficient and fairer economy, the liberals want more. They want equal outcomes.
No, liberals will not be moving right.
And I disagree with your characterization of identity politics vs. economic solidarity. The former is the means of achieving the latter. To drop identity politics would mean selling economic solidarity on its own merits. While there is very strong case for government to encourage a more efficient and fairer economy, the liberals want more. They want equal outcomes.
No, liberals will not be moving right.
39
Nor should they move right. It's not in their DNA. Let them be the loyal opposition for now and help soften some of the hard edges to come from this administration. But Ross's point, no matter how poorly made, is that a focus on identity politics and subservience to government handouts is not a winning strategy in the near term. Hopefully, never will be again. An entire forgotten multi-colored cohort of this country roared that economic well-being and self-respect matter more. We are all Americans. Think of us as such. We've elected you to govern this country as such.
7
I dont want equal outcomes. But when I observe that the outcomes of some traditionally-discriminated-against minorities and women are orders-of-magnitude worse than for white men, I am concerned that the *starting point* is part of the problem.
This liberal thinks that it is immoral that we fund school from local taxes. All children should get an equal START. Something the right have exactly zero interest in because they need a class of aggrieved bone-heads (I grew up with these guys, unlike, I'm sure, YOU) to vote for their upper class tax breaks and loose regulations.
This liberal thinks that it is immoral that we fund school from local taxes. All children should get an equal START. Something the right have exactly zero interest in because they need a class of aggrieved bone-heads (I grew up with these guys, unlike, I'm sure, YOU) to vote for their upper class tax breaks and loose regulations.
6
"Equal outcomes?" No, that's not what liberals want. This claim is made by the right wing to put into people's heads what the righties would like for liberals to think. However, no liberal I know ever said anything remotely akin to equal outcomes. What a foolish and blatantly false assertion. One more thing, liberals tend to go on factual evidence, not what they want to believe, regardless of facts, like the righties. I would ascribe to equal opportunity for all however.
11
As is so often the case with Ross Douthat's work, this piece is absurdly wrong-headed.
The Democratic defeat in the Electoral College (not in the popular vote) was fueled by populist anger among a traditional Democratic constituency-- working class whites-- who felt understandably left behind by the slow economic recovery and the Party's embrace of neo-liberalism.
Rightly or wrongly, working class whites identified Hillary Clinton with Wall Street and the coastal elites. For this group, Clinton's economic prescriptions were too conservative, too cautious, too skewed toward the haves, not the have-nots. Bernie Sanders and his progressive economic agenda won their support. When Sanders was pushed aside, Donald Trump appropriated his message, if not his methods, ultimately capturing the working class at the polls.
Ironically, Trump won the Electoral College by running to Clinton's left on key economic issues. A rightward shift by the Democratic Party would exacerbate Clinton's missteps: it is precisely the wrong thing to do.
The Democratic defeat in the Electoral College (not in the popular vote) was fueled by populist anger among a traditional Democratic constituency-- working class whites-- who felt understandably left behind by the slow economic recovery and the Party's embrace of neo-liberalism.
Rightly or wrongly, working class whites identified Hillary Clinton with Wall Street and the coastal elites. For this group, Clinton's economic prescriptions were too conservative, too cautious, too skewed toward the haves, not the have-nots. Bernie Sanders and his progressive economic agenda won their support. When Sanders was pushed aside, Donald Trump appropriated his message, if not his methods, ultimately capturing the working class at the polls.
Ironically, Trump won the Electoral College by running to Clinton's left on key economic issues. A rightward shift by the Democratic Party would exacerbate Clinton's missteps: it is precisely the wrong thing to do.
617
Trump ran to Clinton's left on key economic issues? Say what? Trump ran against free trade agreements, off-shoring (Carrier anyone?) and uncontrolled illegal immigration. I heard Clinton running away from the TPP but not from NAFTA and the concept of free trade agreements. Also, Trump's position will probably turn out to be flimsy - he says he'll "withdraw" from TPP, hard to do as we aren't "in" it, but whatever. He'll reject TPP and then negotiate a bunch of bilateral agreements with individual nations. The public forgot to read the fine print, which of course, Trump did not show them until after the election - classic flim-flam man's methods. But the point is, Clinton did not enthusiastically embrace an end to free-trade agreements. She was clearly forced into a position against the TPP. Other than that, I didn't hear a position about globalization and free trade. And I was listening. Most people aren't.
1
"Neo-liberalism" has been a thing for fifteen minutes and I have no idea what you are talking about. You fall into the same trap as Douthat: everything is left or right and when traditional descriptions of voting blocks don't fit we make some up: neo-liberalism. Nothing about Trump's ascension was due to politics or policy prescriptions. He never had any.
1
The Republicans have not achieved a majority in presidential elections without the help of a war since 1988.
Moving to the right only puts the Dems in competition with the GOP over voters on the right while voters on the left fall out of participation for lack of decent representation.
In 2020 the millennials will be 30% of the electorate. 80% of millennials wanted Sanders. Hillary not picking up Sanders for her ticket is how she lost Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania. Today Millennials are anyone who is under 41. In 2020 they will be anyone under 45.
Meanwhile everyone over 55 will be wanting their Medicade back after they find out that no private insurance company will sell them health insurance at a reasonable rate after turning 55.
So the GOP will have all the white voters over 45 and under 55 that hate people of color. Good luck with that demographic.
Moving to the right only puts the Dems in competition with the GOP over voters on the right while voters on the left fall out of participation for lack of decent representation.
In 2020 the millennials will be 30% of the electorate. 80% of millennials wanted Sanders. Hillary not picking up Sanders for her ticket is how she lost Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania. Today Millennials are anyone who is under 41. In 2020 they will be anyone under 45.
Meanwhile everyone over 55 will be wanting their Medicade back after they find out that no private insurance company will sell them health insurance at a reasonable rate after turning 55.
So the GOP will have all the white voters over 45 and under 55 that hate people of color. Good luck with that demographic.
139
RE: "Meanwhile everyone over 55 will be wanting their Medicade back..."
It's Medicare, and it's 65, not 55.
Medicaid is a different program and it's frustrating that the two are so often conflated. I would think a Sanders supporter would know this.
It's Medicare, and it's 65, not 55.
Medicaid is a different program and it's frustrating that the two are so often conflated. I would think a Sanders supporter would know this.
11
"Hillary not picking up Sanders for her ticket is how she lost Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania."
It wasn't just that: It was that she could in no way credibly claim to be battling the political and business establishment. And Americans strongly and firmly believe, with good reason, that their political and business establishment has mostly failed them.
It wasn't just that: It was that she could in no way credibly claim to be battling the political and business establishment. And Americans strongly and firmly believe, with good reason, that their political and business establishment has mostly failed them.
3
I meant Medicare. Oops. I know that medicare is for people over 65, but people over 55, once Obamacare is gone, will find they cannot afford to buy private health insurance. Without Obamacare they will want Medicare pushed down to 55.
5
The real question the Right denies is will Democrats become racists/xenophobes/misogynists--duplicating and adapting the President-elect's winning strategy, now being obscured as good sales craft, intuitive connections to workers--when the verbal, visual, and policy clues and cues of the campaign was the sturm and drang of an absolutism in which power would be given free rein by emotional appeals to violate the constitution and limit freedom in the name of safety and law and order as justice and fairness was denied to millions.
Will Democrats embrace the worst of America's historic social ills--the new forms of racism and its random forms of government-sanctioned expanding violence, the willingness to imprison women as Indiana did for abortions, the embrace of fear and spending public money for private benefit (the Carrier ransom), a reverse socialism for the wealthy to which we are all expected to contribute without complaint.
The question is will Democrats stop relying on the Podestas and run winning campaigns as seen in CA and NC, an indication the party's wide base, especially when the popular vote is viewed.
Disengaged from partisanship, will Democrats work to build state organizations that are effective in local elections, identify clear growth strategies, make all Americans feel safe despite appeals to fear and persistent scapegoating, and protect the historic benefits the political economy provides to the working class?
That answer better be yes!
Will Democrats embrace the worst of America's historic social ills--the new forms of racism and its random forms of government-sanctioned expanding violence, the willingness to imprison women as Indiana did for abortions, the embrace of fear and spending public money for private benefit (the Carrier ransom), a reverse socialism for the wealthy to which we are all expected to contribute without complaint.
The question is will Democrats stop relying on the Podestas and run winning campaigns as seen in CA and NC, an indication the party's wide base, especially when the popular vote is viewed.
Disengaged from partisanship, will Democrats work to build state organizations that are effective in local elections, identify clear growth strategies, make all Americans feel safe despite appeals to fear and persistent scapegoating, and protect the historic benefits the political economy provides to the working class?
That answer better be yes!
261
Note to Ross: fighting racism, et al. is not a "cultural war." It is the oldest fight within America's political economy, embraced when its settlements were colonies. It poured forth to the West, entrenched in urban areas and created privilege and wealth through its restrictions and conscious applications in hiring, housing, education, and opportunities of merit.
To call America's oldest fight for freedom and inclusive prosperity a "cultural war" is disingenuous--the kind of shibboleth that Chief Justice Roger Taney (who felt white supremacy was ordained by God and supported by law and historic fact) would be proud: it skirts the main issue, denies its poison, and dwells in myth.
The fact is billionaires are now put in charge of administering the government--none of whom have a record of wins for the middle class--all steeped in the privilege America grants to the powerful.
To call America's oldest fight for freedom and inclusive prosperity a "cultural war" is disingenuous--the kind of shibboleth that Chief Justice Roger Taney (who felt white supremacy was ordained by God and supported by law and historic fact) would be proud: it skirts the main issue, denies its poison, and dwells in myth.
The fact is billionaires are now put in charge of administering the government--none of whom have a record of wins for the middle class--all steeped in the privilege America grants to the powerful.
473
I suppose we can all have different views on things, but my view is that the U.S. has only one governing principle, free contract.
The GOP has only one prime directive: the ever greater concentration of wealth and power.
They succeed in this by undermining everyone elses agency for bargaininng: workers/unions, middle class/affordable quality education, very poor/ACORN. Meanwhile they reinforce the agency of the rich: the ltd liability corp.
They are like a giant hover vacuum sucking up and sucking in all other groups resources for the benefit of the 1%. This is why many on the left call the GOP the wrecking crew.
The more they succeed at this, the harder it is for them to win elections as more and more people are impoverished. So they have to migrate over to more and more radical politics that are more and more fictional. This is why many on the left call them the clown car. This is why they have to suppress voters, something that they wouldnt have attempted prior to 1980.
Bigotry helps them to make voters forget that their poorer because the GOP stripped them of their bargaining power. It also helps them to further vacuum resources out of other groups.
We're only about 6 years of GOP runaway rule from Brietbart Republicans openly advocating for a repeal of the 13th amendment. Which is really just a stripping of peoples bargaining power.
Likewise Trump wants to strip flag burners of their citizenship. Also a loss of bargaining power.
This is what I think is going on.
The GOP has only one prime directive: the ever greater concentration of wealth and power.
They succeed in this by undermining everyone elses agency for bargaininng: workers/unions, middle class/affordable quality education, very poor/ACORN. Meanwhile they reinforce the agency of the rich: the ltd liability corp.
They are like a giant hover vacuum sucking up and sucking in all other groups resources for the benefit of the 1%. This is why many on the left call the GOP the wrecking crew.
The more they succeed at this, the harder it is for them to win elections as more and more people are impoverished. So they have to migrate over to more and more radical politics that are more and more fictional. This is why many on the left call them the clown car. This is why they have to suppress voters, something that they wouldnt have attempted prior to 1980.
Bigotry helps them to make voters forget that their poorer because the GOP stripped them of their bargaining power. It also helps them to further vacuum resources out of other groups.
We're only about 6 years of GOP runaway rule from Brietbart Republicans openly advocating for a repeal of the 13th amendment. Which is really just a stripping of peoples bargaining power.
Likewise Trump wants to strip flag burners of their citizenship. Also a loss of bargaining power.
This is what I think is going on.
90
If the scale and weight of the Democrats historic tendency to irresponsibly fail to build their party from governorships, state assemblies, etc. down to dog catcher is great than that would be one of the top reasons they lost.
There is almost no mention of this big fact, until and only scarce mention of it when they lose. Its not a topic cable newsiness which relies on histrionics for ratings ever goes near.
There is almost no mention of this big fact, until and only scarce mention of it when they lose. Its not a topic cable newsiness which relies on histrionics for ratings ever goes near.
1
Moving toward the center helps only when the intended audience perceives it as such. Making people work for their benefits does no good if a belief exists that they are getting stuff free. Obama has deported many people but has the reputation of not deporting anyone.
Moving toward the center will sometimes not be noticed and sometimes be used against the movers. This is a matter of advertising/marketing/propaganda. The Democrats do not need to move but rather to rebrand. Moving will do them no good if they do not rebrand, and if they rebrand they do not need to move.
This means that the Republican excellence is not in policy or managing the economy. It is in branding, propaganda, and ideological warfare. Doing a good job and hoping it will be noticed does not work. To resurrect their ideological warfare and branding, Democrats are going to have to bring talk of class back to the political arena, because only talk of class can make their policies make moral sense and give them coherence. This is what Bernie did and it explains much of his success.
Moving toward the center will sometimes not be noticed and sometimes be used against the movers. This is a matter of advertising/marketing/propaganda. The Democrats do not need to move but rather to rebrand. Moving will do them no good if they do not rebrand, and if they rebrand they do not need to move.
This means that the Republican excellence is not in policy or managing the economy. It is in branding, propaganda, and ideological warfare. Doing a good job and hoping it will be noticed does not work. To resurrect their ideological warfare and branding, Democrats are going to have to bring talk of class back to the political arena, because only talk of class can make their policies make moral sense and give them coherence. This is what Bernie did and it explains much of his success.
245
"The Republican excellence is not in policy or managing the economy. It is in branding, propaganda, and ideological warfare. Doing a good job and hoping it will be noticed does not work." Boy, amen to that. Well put.
8
Exactly.
Great post which deserves NYT pick.
2
Democrats need to move left, especially the party leadership that tried to suppress the Sanders campaign. This Republican is not the guy to be giving advice to Democrats, and he's wasting his time hoping that Democrats would become more like Republicans. Bernie Sanders was successful because he presented a sincere liberal/left message to voters and a large number of them realized that his views and policy preferences are what they see as necessary to make and keep America great, regardless of the billions of dollars worth of rightwing propaganda Americans have been bombarded with from rightwing radio, Fox News and similar sources for 30 years.
773
Great comment and exactly right.
20
I agree that Democrats need to campaign more in the style of Bernie Sanders, with special emphasis on our opposition to the control of government policy by billionaires and wealthy corporations. Under the Republicans, government Labor Policy is set by Management. Hillary adopted progressive policies on many issues. But she never gave the simple message that she was running against the excessive power of the Billionaire Class. Many liberals are uncomfortable identifying an enemy using class lines. However, the great liberal, Franklin D. Roosevelt, proud to be called a traitor to his class, said, "I wear their scorn as a badge of honor."
Millions lost their homes to foreclosure and the Obama administration rescued all of the banks but few home owners. None of the Wall Street bankers went to jail, although from the fines paid criminal wrongdoing was clear. Is it any wonder that the white working-class people who lost their homes felt the Democrats who controlled the Presidency and Congress in 2009-10 abandoned them.
If Democrats fail to name the class enemy, the Republicans are always happy to spin a tale giving their choice for the people's enemy. Since Spiro Agnew, they have blamed the country's problems on liberal intellectuals, the liberal media, minorities, illegal immigrants, and student protestors. If we fail to point out the group which has the power to grab a bigger and bigger piece of the pie, people will not see us as serious about reigning in that power.
Millions lost their homes to foreclosure and the Obama administration rescued all of the banks but few home owners. None of the Wall Street bankers went to jail, although from the fines paid criminal wrongdoing was clear. Is it any wonder that the white working-class people who lost their homes felt the Democrats who controlled the Presidency and Congress in 2009-10 abandoned them.
If Democrats fail to name the class enemy, the Republicans are always happy to spin a tale giving their choice for the people's enemy. Since Spiro Agnew, they have blamed the country's problems on liberal intellectuals, the liberal media, minorities, illegal immigrants, and student protestors. If we fail to point out the group which has the power to grab a bigger and bigger piece of the pie, people will not see us as serious about reigning in that power.
14
I believe you are right...the Democrats will move left. I also believe that history repeats itself....first as tragedy and then as farce. It was a tragedy that the Democrats lost a winnable election. The next time they lose it will undoubtedly be a complete farce. The 2020 Republican Presidential candidate will espouse the same positions as Trump but will not have the same baggage. He won't make the same blunders, he won't run the same sloppy campaign. The Democrats in their lemming like need to destroy themselves will put up an unelectable candidate but one who is ideologically pure ....to the far left. We know how this story ends. They will be the only ones in the room (along with their self deluded far left adherents) that will not see the obvious coming ...an apocalyptic defeat...more soul searching. It's going to take more than one lesson and they are going to get more than one lesson. Ross Douthat for once is spot on. The rational Democratic Party leadership needs to move right today if it ever wants to win another significant election. I would go one step further. Garlic Toast and friends need to either join the Socialist party where they will be happier or pipe down and let the adults run the show. The Democrats can probably win without the far left . But they most certainly will lose major election after election as they are already doing if they continue to listen to their tone deaf prescriptions.
5
The Sanders Campaign ignited a group of people who lost interest or never had interest in Democratic Politics because they saw little difference between the two Parties other than rhetoric. And many of them stayed home in November or voted for Third Party candidates. I know because I was one of them, voting for Gary Johnson in protest of the SuperDelegate Candidate with the Democratic nomination.
Call us particular, but we want Democratic Candidates that have Democratic values. If you are a friend of Bankster-In-Chief Lloyd Blankfein, a supporter of the Military-Industrial Complex and National Security State, a supporter of these destructive so-called Free Trade Deals, always looking to meddle in Middle Eastern Politics, take money from the for profit prison industry and such we have no interest in what you are selling and do not trust you. If those are your values you might want to give the Republican Party a try.
If one looks at the vote totals from this year's election you will see Hillary did not bring people to the polls and the Republicans got roughly their normal number. Graphic here
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cw2OIGhXgAAQBUu.jpg:large