<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: For Demos, 3 Numbers = 1 Problem</title>
	<atom:link href="http://donklephant.com/2005/09/26/for-demos-3-numbers-1-problem/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://donklephant.com/2005/09/26/for-demos-3-numbers-1-problem/</link>
	<description>Big Teeth. Huge Ass. Surprisingly Reasonable.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 14:03:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: kreiz</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2005/09/26/for-demos-3-numbers-1-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-2542</link>
		<dc:creator>kreiz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Sep 2005 02:36:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=948#comment-2542</guid>
		<description>100% concurrence, Callimachus.  There&#039;s a tremendous opportunity here- frame it any way you want- voters want competent government.  For the first time in decades, the GOP has demonstrated an inability to deliver.  But I haven&#039;t seen a Dem leader courageous or visionary enough to grab that message and moment.  Instead, Dem pols seem to fall back to interest politics.  This could be a momentous shift ala 1932 or 1980.  But someone has to galvanize and embody (yes, even ooze) competence.  Giuliani is the only one who comes to mind- and he&#039;s in the wrong party.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>100% concurrence, Callimachus.  There&#8217;s a tremendous opportunity here- frame it any way you want- voters want competent government.  For the first time in decades, the GOP has demonstrated an inability to deliver.  But I haven&#8217;t seen a Dem leader courageous or visionary enough to grab that message and moment.  Instead, Dem pols seem to fall back to interest politics.  This could be a momentous shift ala 1932 or 1980.  But someone has to galvanize and embody (yes, even ooze) competence.  Giuliani is the only one who comes to mind- and he&#8217;s in the wrong party.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Callimachus</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2005/09/26/for-demos-3-numbers-1-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-2538</link>
		<dc:creator>Callimachus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2005 21:59:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=948#comment-2538</guid>
		<description>Right, kreiz. But there&#039;s a wedge to be made in that issue. So far, the Democrats don&#039;t seem to have noticed it yet. Instead of rhetoric that basically promises to tax people more, they can say, you&#039;re taxed enough, but we need to change the ways your money is spent, so it does more good for all Americans, including you.

That&#039;s easy to say, but to really mean it, you have to become the party of leaner, meaner government. Gods know, the way things are going in the White House these days, that job is open. But how many Democrats are really willing to step up and fill it?

Also, the anti-tax-cut rhetoric is a shot in the foot. Sometimes a tax cut for the rich really does stimulate the economy -- if there&#039;s a new techonlogy opening up and starving for investment money, for instance. That&#039;s why Reagan&#039;s cuts worked so well. But that wasn&#039;t the situation this time around.

Be a little smarter, Democrats. Don&#039;t say &quot;tax cuts are evil&quot; and expect to win middle class votes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Right, kreiz. But there&#8217;s a wedge to be made in that issue. So far, the Democrats don&#8217;t seem to have noticed it yet. Instead of rhetoric that basically promises to tax people more, they can say, you&#8217;re taxed enough, but we need to change the ways your money is spent, so it does more good for all Americans, including you.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s easy to say, but to really mean it, you have to become the party of leaner, meaner government. Gods know, the way things are going in the White House these days, that job is open. But how many Democrats are really willing to step up and fill it?</p>
<p>Also, the anti-tax-cut rhetoric is a shot in the foot. Sometimes a tax cut for the rich really does stimulate the economy &#8212; if there&#8217;s a new techonlogy opening up and starving for investment money, for instance. That&#8217;s why Reagan&#8217;s cuts worked so well. But that wasn&#8217;t the situation this time around.</p>
<p>Be a little smarter, Democrats. Don&#8217;t say &#8220;tax cuts are evil&#8221; and expect to win middle class votes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kreiz</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2005/09/26/for-demos-3-numbers-1-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-2537</link>
		<dc:creator>kreiz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2005 21:35:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=948#comment-2537</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s a substantive problem as well, Justin, and not just an issue of framing or phrasing.  Many middle-class suburbanites are sensitive to higher taxes because they&#039;re largely employed.  The GOP has successfully exploited this for years.  So while this group may be drawn to the luster of national health insurance or free college tuition, they&#039;re mindful that such programs aren&#039;t free.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s a substantive problem as well, Justin, and not just an issue of framing or phrasing.  Many middle-class suburbanites are sensitive to higher taxes because they&#8217;re largely employed.  The GOP has successfully exploited this for years.  So while this group may be drawn to the luster of national health insurance or free college tuition, they&#8217;re mindful that such programs aren&#8217;t free.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Justin Gardner</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2005/09/26/for-demos-3-numbers-1-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-2535</link>
		<dc:creator>Justin Gardner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2005 20:04:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=948#comment-2535</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Edwards is an attractive, intelligent and articulate candidate, to be sure. But IÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢m unfond of his ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã…â€œTwo WorldsÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã‚? approach. Apart from being oversimplistic, it renders politically homeless a large number of voting suburbanites- who are neither rich or poor but who are looking for some government aid in their lives.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I agree with this sentiment, as they would be of the &quot;have not&quot; world. That&#039;s certainly a problem since those people probably don&#039;t want to grouped alongside urban minorities who are traditionally the poorest groups in this country. A difficult communication problem to say the very least.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Edwards is an attractive, intelligent and articulate candidate, to be sure. But IÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢m unfond of his ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã…â€œTwo WorldsÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã‚? approach. Apart from being oversimplistic, it renders politically homeless a large number of voting suburbanites- who are neither rich or poor but who are looking for some government aid in their lives.</p></blockquote>
<p>I agree with this sentiment, as they would be of the &#8220;have not&#8221; world. That&#8217;s certainly a problem since those people probably don&#8217;t want to grouped alongside urban minorities who are traditionally the poorest groups in this country. A difficult communication problem to say the very least.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kreiz</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2005/09/26/for-demos-3-numbers-1-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-2533</link>
		<dc:creator>kreiz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2005 19:46:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=948#comment-2533</guid>
		<description>Edwards is an attractive, intelligent and articulate candidate, to be sure.  But I&#039;m unfond of his &quot;Two Worlds&quot; approach.  Apart from being oversimplistic, it renders politically homeless a large number of voting suburbanites- who are neither rich or poor but who are looking for some government aid in their lives.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Edwards is an attractive, intelligent and articulate candidate, to be sure.  But I&#8217;m unfond of his &#8220;Two Worlds&#8221; approach.  Apart from being oversimplistic, it renders politically homeless a large number of voting suburbanites- who are neither rich or poor but who are looking for some government aid in their lives.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Callimachus</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2005/09/26/for-demos-3-numbers-1-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-2531</link>
		<dc:creator>Callimachus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2005 18:56:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=948#comment-2531</guid>
		<description>Well, Edwards isn&#039;t a bad place to start to rebuild a genuine, robust American party. He&#039;s nobody&#039;s ideal yet, perhaps, but he&#039;s seems to see the light beyond the wilderness.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, Edwards isn&#8217;t a bad place to start to rebuild a genuine, robust American party. He&#8217;s nobody&#8217;s ideal yet, perhaps, but he&#8217;s seems to see the light beyond the wilderness.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Brinkley</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2005/09/26/for-demos-3-numbers-1-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-2523</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Brinkley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2005 16:58:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=948#comment-2523</guid>
		<description>Personally, I couldn&#039;t care less whether the Democratic Party implodes or not.  I want a realistic message of civil rights, &lt;i&gt;some&lt;/i&gt; social safety measures, and a purer capitalism where consumers can be more informed.  At this point, I don&#039;t care what party carries it.  The Dems have the most infrastructure, but it doesn&#039;t fit their current message (if you could call a picket sign reading &quot;THE END IS NEAR&quot; a message).  The Libertarians have the opposite problem; it fits their message more, but they have no money.

I don&#039;t know if this is showing above, but I&#039;m kinda in a snit right now, because I just read another indirect threat message from a Democrat.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Personally, I couldn&#8217;t care less whether the Democratic Party implodes or not.  I want a realistic message of civil rights, <i>some</i> social safety measures, and a purer capitalism where consumers can be more informed.  At this point, I don&#8217;t care what party carries it.  The Dems have the most infrastructure, but it doesn&#8217;t fit their current message (if you could call a picket sign reading &#8220;THE END IS NEAR&#8221; a message).  The Libertarians have the opposite problem; it fits their message more, but they have no money.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t know if this is showing above, but I&#8217;m kinda in a snit right now, because I just read another indirect threat message from a Democrat.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kreiz</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2005/09/26/for-demos-3-numbers-1-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-2521</link>
		<dc:creator>kreiz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2005 16:24:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=948#comment-2521</guid>
		<description>That being said, I agree 100% with Cal that I want to see a prospering Democratic Party.  However, there&#039;s a huge difference between the negative &quot;Hoping for GOP Misfortune&quot; as opposed to a positive &quot;We Have an Agenda&quot;.  Watched former Senator Edwards on CSpan&#039;s campaign trail, talking about free college and health care for all Americans.  Is Santa Claus the titular head of the Dem Party?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That being said, I agree 100% with Cal that I want to see a prospering Democratic Party.  However, there&#8217;s a huge difference between the negative &#8220;Hoping for GOP Misfortune&#8221; as opposed to a positive &#8220;We Have an Agenda&#8221;.  Watched former Senator Edwards on CSpan&#8217;s campaign trail, talking about free college and health care for all Americans.  Is Santa Claus the titular head of the Dem Party?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kreiz</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2005/09/26/for-demos-3-numbers-1-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-2520</link>
		<dc:creator>kreiz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2005 16:06:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=948#comment-2520</guid>
		<description>The &quot;walk in the wilderness&quot; has been going on a long, long time and its end is nowhere in sight.  I&#039;ve been reading similar articles about dysfunctional Donks for at least 20 years, maybe more.  This isn&#039;t a new examination.  Dems have been reexamining themselves since McGovern lost to Nixon (1972) and Carter was butchered by Reagan (1980).   Certainly in 1988 following Dukakis&#039; loss, these articles were everywhere.  This is just part of a long line of hand-wringing on the aimlessness of the Democratic Party.  The one new twist in EJ&#039;s approach?  The numbers are increasingly anti-liberal- more bad news.  Other than that, it&#039;s deja vu all over again.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The &#8220;walk in the wilderness&#8221; has been going on a long, long time and its end is nowhere in sight.  I&#8217;ve been reading similar articles about dysfunctional Donks for at least 20 years, maybe more.  This isn&#8217;t a new examination.  Dems have been reexamining themselves since McGovern lost to Nixon (1972) and Carter was butchered by Reagan (1980).   Certainly in 1988 following Dukakis&#8217; loss, these articles were everywhere.  This is just part of a long line of hand-wringing on the aimlessness of the Democratic Party.  The one new twist in EJ&#8217;s approach?  The numbers are increasingly anti-liberal- more bad news.  Other than that, it&#8217;s deja vu all over again.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2005/09/26/for-demos-3-numbers-1-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-2519</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2005 15:49:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=948#comment-2519</guid>
		<description>larry is right that the Democrats&#039; walk in the Wilderness may not be best for the country, aat least in the short term, but it will be good for the Democrats. 

The &quot;pessimism about AmericaÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢s history and its virtues&quot; is a relic of the Civil Rights era and Vietnam, ironically, because that was a time when those virtues triumphed. But many of the leaders were either overtly religious leaders or else borrowed the emotional vocabulary of morality and religion, and that lead the discussion into an unending confession of sin. People have continued to indulge in this for two reasons. One is that we are raised to feel best about ourselves when we are maligning ourselves the worst. It is a form of moral exhibitionism. The other is that it reminds a certain generation of when they were cool and young and righteous, so they cling to it for the mst selfish reasons.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>larry is right that the Democrats&#8217; walk in the Wilderness may not be best for the country, aat least in the short term, but it will be good for the Democrats. </p>
<p>The &#8220;pessimism about AmericaÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢s history and its virtues&#8221; is a relic of the Civil Rights era and Vietnam, ironically, because that was a time when those virtues triumphed. But many of the leaders were either overtly religious leaders or else borrowed the emotional vocabulary of morality and religion, and that lead the discussion into an unending confession of sin. People have continued to indulge in this for two reasons. One is that we are raised to feel best about ourselves when we are maligning ourselves the worst. It is a form of moral exhibitionism. The other is that it reminds a certain generation of when they were cool and young and righteous, so they cling to it for the mst selfish reasons.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jimbo</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2005/09/26/for-demos-3-numbers-1-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-2505</link>
		<dc:creator>jimbo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2005 08:43:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=948#comment-2505</guid>
		<description>As a frustrated Democrat, I understand your concern.  Bush hatred is a real puzzle.  Start with the fact that, whether or not you like him, Bush will not be on the ballot in &#039;08.  Given that, as you say, Democrats need to be talking about their vision.  Another concern is that many Democrats at the grass roots have lost touch with economic reality.  They want to tax and regulate the entire economy and are largely silent on the GOP&#039;s deficit-funded pork, so long as they get their share.  It is this that will keep them from power.  I&#039;m concerned that the GOP base is now a gaggle of fundamentalists, national security fascists, and plain old law &#039;n order types who are building a machine for total state control of our lives.  The Democrats&#039; response to this is pandering to the civil rights and pro-abortion hacks who are their base.  There is room in this for a non-wacko libertarian candidate to have some success and perhaps force one of the major parties to come to its senses.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As a frustrated Democrat, I understand your concern.  Bush hatred is a real puzzle.  Start with the fact that, whether or not you like him, Bush will not be on the ballot in &#8217;08.  Given that, as you say, Democrats need to be talking about their vision.  Another concern is that many Democrats at the grass roots have lost touch with economic reality.  They want to tax and regulate the entire economy and are largely silent on the GOP&#8217;s deficit-funded pork, so long as they get their share.  It is this that will keep them from power.  I&#8217;m concerned that the GOP base is now a gaggle of fundamentalists, national security fascists, and plain old law &#8216;n order types who are building a machine for total state control of our lives.  The Democrats&#8217; response to this is pandering to the civil rights and pro-abortion hacks who are their base.  There is room in this for a non-wacko libertarian candidate to have some success and perhaps force one of the major parties to come to its senses.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Larry</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2005/09/26/for-demos-3-numbers-1-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-2504</link>
		<dc:creator>Larry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2005 06:41:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=948#comment-2504</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s refreshing to read a post by a reasonable Democrat who can see the detrimental effect that political hatred is having on the party&#039;s prospects.  As a Republican, I&#039;m glad that our side has made significant gains in the last few elections.  But, I am under no illusion that &quot;Republicanism&quot; is the cure for society&#039;s ills. Our founders instituted an ingenious form of government that relies on checks and balances precisely because they understood human nature and the corrupting influence of absolute power. The succession of losses incurred by Democrats over the past few years does not provide the electoral &quot;balance&quot; that is healthy for our society, but is understandable considering their dearth of ideas and the requisite optimism to lead.  While I do not look forward to the day when Democrats are again running the government, I do think it&#039;s healthy for political leaders to lose once in awhile (including our side).  Losing is humbling and can afford an opportunity for introspection. Unfortunately, instead of taking this opportunity to formulate policies that would actually help our society, many Democrats are busy rooting for its failure, as you correctly pointed out (I&#039;m still amazed by how many politicians place their personal/political welfare above that of the nation they&#039;re supposed to be serving). If they continue to fail to provide the leadership necessary to improve our society, the Democrat party will lose elections into the foreseeable future, which is not healthy for our Republic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s refreshing to read a post by a reasonable Democrat who can see the detrimental effect that political hatred is having on the party&#8217;s prospects.  As a Republican, I&#8217;m glad that our side has made significant gains in the last few elections.  But, I am under no illusion that &#8220;Republicanism&#8221; is the cure for society&#8217;s ills. Our founders instituted an ingenious form of government that relies on checks and balances precisely because they understood human nature and the corrupting influence of absolute power. The succession of losses incurred by Democrats over the past few years does not provide the electoral &#8220;balance&#8221; that is healthy for our society, but is understandable considering their dearth of ideas and the requisite optimism to lead.  While I do not look forward to the day when Democrats are again running the government, I do think it&#8217;s healthy for political leaders to lose once in awhile (including our side).  Losing is humbling and can afford an opportunity for introspection. Unfortunately, instead of taking this opportunity to formulate policies that would actually help our society, many Democrats are busy rooting for its failure, as you correctly pointed out (I&#8217;m still amazed by how many politicians place their personal/political welfare above that of the nation they&#8217;re supposed to be serving). If they continue to fail to provide the leadership necessary to improve our society, the Democrat party will lose elections into the foreseeable future, which is not healthy for our Republic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

