In the next couple of decades, America is going to have to grapple with two major changes. The first is that there are going to be new first-world powers, like China, Brazil and India, that we will have to reckon with. The West will not be driving things the way we have been accustomed to since the end of World War Two.
The second is that the American electorate is going to be more diverse and left-leaning, more like Europe.
In both cases, Hillary Clinton seems ill-suited to be our leader. The future is more Bill de Blasio than Andrew Cuomo, and the Clintons probably don’t get that. Still, Andrew Sullivan’s dripping contempt of the Clintons is irritating. He opposes them for all the wrong reasons and none of the right ones.
While I think the Clintons are a bit “out of time,” I don’t necessarily think this is a terrible thing for a country that is going to have some serious difficulties adjusting to new realities. Clinton could serve as a bit of a buffer, allowing the country to adjust to the changed world in way that doesn’t put too much shock into the system.
We should not underestimate the threat that the reactionary rebellion against change represents in this country. They are on the verge of defeat, they know it, and they aren’t going to take it lying down.
When the power of the Catholic church started to wane in Ireland their last act was to push through a constitutional ban on abortion (which is really hard to get rid of – you have to persuade people to turn out and directly vote in favour of allowing abortion, which is “icky”).
How much damage can your right do before they fade?
Depends on whether or not they can elect a president. I don’t think they can, but I can’t be certain about that.
Our conservative rats have painted themselves into a demographic corner.
And, like cornered rats, will lash-out!
The next decade or two will be very perilous for this country.
We aren’t as “exceptional” as our conservatives think – especially, the uber-Christian ones.
Other people in other countries, think that they’re exceptional, too.
Our conservatives won’t be able to handle that.
This time, it is over for the republicans” Do you have any idea how many decades I’ve heard this? I think, 3?
Save yourself a lot of grief, there will be NO WAY in hell this party will sink. The democrats need the republicans to do the bidding of thy corporate masters. Democrats want to keep pretending to be “For the WORKING GUY/the little guy, we are HERE for you!” This is the same shiny object they toss out every single time things look “grim”
Pay attention to how GOP gets their “second wind” You can’t cut off the right arm of a body, no one likes a amputee.
Bill de Blasio’s not that far from Andrew Cuomo!
They’re both within a circle of mainstream Democrats. Heck, de Blasio and Cuomo just did New York State’s latest political deal together to shut down primaries that might challenge entrenched Democrats, some Republicans, and Cuomo himself.
And whose Senate campaign did the new Mayor run in 2000…and who did he ask to swear him in?
C’mon – there’s a bigger claim that Mayor de Blasion is a Clinton ally than Andrew Cuomo has – Cuomo can’t stand Hillary, de Blasio loves her.
DeBlasio may actually be a pretty good role model of a thoroughly mainstream Dem politician- indeed, a Clinton protege- heading successfully in a mildly populist direction. (The country ultimately needs much more than that, but you have to start somewhere.) Hillary would do well to take some lessons from DeBlasio for her campaign.
Good to see that other people finally understand the strategy of the RWNJ’s. This has been evident since the 1990’s. Impeachment, 2000 election, Iraq, the Lesser Depression – it’s all part of the same era of reactionary excess.
It’s scorched earth all the way, right up to and including the Supreme Court. Their immediate minimum goals are to make the progressive portion of the country re-win every bit of territory won since 1933 in the next 25-50 years, if we can.
And then hope that somehow reinforcements arrive in the meantime, through some calamity they can pin on the liberals/progressives, like the 60’s/70’s.
In a very perverse way it’s admirable how committed they are to the nihilism as the alternative to accepting their loss in the marketplace of ideas. We can’t even get people to vote in mid-terms or stick out a tough presidential race/recount, while they are committed to complete annihilation of everything at any cost rather than accept the basic principles of democracy.
I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.
Barry Goldwater
It should be a banner & On every political progressive/democratic page/site where the mantra is “Republican Party is doomed”
Really? How many new Obama voters are going to support the coalition of progressives? That’s political gravity that the GOP has already calculated into the equation. Have the DNC? …….
The domination of the West goes back at least to the British conquest of India in the 1700’s. You could make a very good case it goes back a century before that.
How left-leaning the electorate becomes will be determined by whether we can get in some relatively basic policies to help ordinary citizens after 2016. The millenials lean left, but they’ve still largely fallen for the RW propaganda that the government can’t fix things. Expanding the minimum wage and some fixes to Obamacare could put that nonsense to rest for decades.
How are you going to get basic policies changed when both parties are beholden to rich and corporate donors?
The minimum wage proposal sounds good until one remembers EFCA and hoe bravely Democrats pushed it when there wasn’t a chance in Hell of passing it in the House. When they got the House, Senate Democrats ran away from it like a stink bomb. Fool me twice, shame on me.
The theater always gets the people swept up & everyone loses their rational sense. And the chasing of the shiny object begins again.
They just have to remember the following:
Do you really think a country that worships green paper as a god is going to look out for you? Don’t stop believing…like Fleetwood Mac says.
But by saying that we run the risk of being branded “Emoprog” or “Soo negative/ cynical” Well, good luck w/ being beholden to fancy green paper w/ more esoteric symbols than a Jodorowsky film, fellow believers. I’m not going to give too many spoilers…but hell think people over a barrel w/ tattered clothes over a crackling fire and a dog howling to accompany a meal made of garbage.
All three face grave challenges dealing with their own internal issues — political, demographic, ecological, etc.
Think of them as being like the US, but before the Civil War. Big, yes. Important, yes. EU/US big or important — no. Not yet.
Important enough not to turn into enemies or to take for granted? Important enough to declare the foolishness of “The American Century” over?
Also, it seems to me that the US has lots of the same problems that face the BRICS countries in terms of disunity, economic problems, debt problems–and also the EU. The only difference is that for the US and the EU lots of those problems are self-inflicted. For the BRICS countries some problems are a reflection of the US/EU control of the global financial and trade system and the delegation of that control to transnational corporations.
If they turn into enemies, they’d be uncoupling themselves from the very motors that are driving their growth.
That’s the reason why the US walked very carefully around the UK during our Civil War.
The South made concerted efforts to gain the UK’s support.
There’s also climate change and peak oil. Both need a Manhattan Project kind of seriousness. I really don’t have the tolerance for present sorriassedness that I used to have. I wish the old folks would step down. They had their time. It’s time for the new kids to take over.
The left shouldn’t really care for what Mr Bell Curve has to say. He was also against fixing health care in the 90s. Sully needs to be tarred, feathered, pistol whipped, and shot in the ass. He should keep his sniveling weasel ass on his side of the fence.
It’s a little late to worry about shocking the system. We are going to have 8 years with a President whose middle name is Hussein. The nuts are out.
>”We can’t even get people to vote in mid-terms”
This, from the middle of someone else’s response, is for me the elephant in the room.
The only change I would make is “won’t” for “can’t”.
The Democratic Party and progressive PACs COULD get people to vote. If that were clearly acknowledged to be the #1 overriding goal in 2014, it could ABSOLUTELY be done, but it would take a coordinated campaign with unified talking points designed to make the presidential year-midterm turnout schism water cooler conversation.
My prefered method would be to write a set of bills that are deemed to be life-changing for non-midterm voters – whether it be minimum wage, equal pay for women, civil rights, or something entirely different. Publish the bills and have every last ad and campaign state that these bills will be passed without amendments on the first day of the first session where the dems hold the house, senate and WH, and stipulating that Reid will nuke the filibuster for legislation.
That would get so much publicity that news of it would get to the non-voters. In fact, it would get to people who don’t even vote in the presidential years. We have a prohibitive majority of ELIGIBLE voters, and we’re about to get creamed – AGAIN – by actual voters. And nobody in charge cares.
The word midterms needs to be thrown out. Focus on that first and find something that has a sense of urgency. “Midterms” does not.
2)We need a marketing campaign why all elections matter and what happens if you slip incrementally. We don’t have that.
3)The centrists are going to have to have a seat and let the real progressives have a chance at mending our country, might not be successful,ut moderate republican-ism is NOT It
4) NO more excuses why the working class gets shafted, either stand up or wave the white flag.
Present headline of the NYT on line:
Russia Said to Shell Ukraine and Mass Arms Along Border
You just have to love that ‘said to’!
Obama and Biden have both said this according to WCPT. Don’t you believe them?
I don’t get this at all. Sullivan’s commentary made the front page of the Huffington Post too. Why does anyone think he’s a liberal or a progressive. He most certainly is not. He’s gay, so he wants equal rights and all, but that’s about all I have in common with that conservative religious fanatic. Can we please stop pretending his support for gay rights makes him part of the progressive movement?
He does not want equal rights for all. He wants the GOP to act like normal people and he wants LGBTS to be seen as normal. And there’s money and attention that comes with being the gay conservative. If he were a gay liberal he’d be just another blogger. The conservatives write the biggest paychecks.
What conservatives write his paychecks? He’s not a neocon and got drummed out of conservative society.
He made a name for himself long before he was kicked out.
http://thedailybanter.com/2013/01/if-andrew-sullivan-is-the-future-of-journalism-then-journalism-is-
fcked/
The only question I have is why is Sully treated like someone worth listening to?
Thanks for that link. I can’t answer your question either. It makes no sense to me that Booman cares what sullivan thinks about clinton. So he’s in favor of gay marriage… so is dick cheney. I’m pretty sure none of us care what cheney thinks about clinton.
Because he has really interesting fights with his readers (particularly about the bell curve) and because he links to some fascinating sociological stories. I read a lot of interesting stuff I’d never even know about if I didn’t read his blog.
Note I am nor a subscriber.
Exactly. Though I am a subscriber. $20 a year, meh…
I detect an inconsistency in your remarks.
It may well be true that in the changing world and US demographics Hilary Clinton seems ill-suited to be our leader.
However, consider who better to deal effectively with what you believe will happen with your statement below
“We should not underestimate the threat that the reactionary rebellion against change represents in this country. They are on the verge of defeat, they know it, and they aren’t going to take it lying down.”
I do not stain myself with reading Andy Sullivan, but I did read the following headline about his article on Hilary Clinton that quoted “what does Hilary Clinton stand for?” Immediately, I turned over that phrase in my head to “what does she stand against?” and that is, exactly what you described in the afore-quoted remark. Clinton stands the best chance to beat back most(but not all) of the reactionary attacks on the liberal social state with its concomitant policies.
Three major changes, the last being more major than the first two. The whole world is in the same boat on this last one, though. Hopefully that’s only figuratively speaking.