Paul Krugman- Democrats Being Democrats

[n2doc]

On Friday, House Democrats shocked almost everyone by rejecting key provisions needed to complete the Trans-Pacific Partnership, an agreement the White House wants but much of the party doesn’t. On Saturday Hillary Clinton formally began her campaign for president, and surprised most observers with an unapologetically liberal and populist speech.

These are, of course, related events. The Democratic Party is becoming more assertive about its traditional values, a point driven home by Mrs. Clinton’s decision to speak on Roosevelt Island. You could say that Democrats are moving left. But the story is more complicated and interesting than this simple statement can convey.

You see, ever since Ronald Reagan’s election in 1980, Democrats have been on the ideological defensive. Even when they won elections they seemed afraid to endorse clearly progressive positions, eager to demonstrate their centrism by supporting policies like cuts to Social Security that their base hated. But that era appears to be over. Why?

Part of the answer is that Democrats, despite defeats in midterm elections, believe — rightly or wrongly — that the political wind is at their backs. Growing ethnic diversity is producing what should be a more favorable electorate; growing tolerance is turning social issues, once a source of Republican strength, into a Democratic advantage instead. Reagan was elected by a nation in which half the public still disapproved of interracial marriage; Mrs. Clinton is running to lead a nation in which 60 percent support same-sex marriage.

At the same time, Democrats seem finally to have taken on board something political scientists have been telling us for years: adopting “centrist” positions in an attempt to attract swing voters is a mug’s game, because such voters don’t exist. Most supposed independents are in fact strongly aligned with one party or the other, and the handful who aren’t are mainly just confused. So you might as well take a stand for what you believe in.

more
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/15/opinion/paul-krugman-democrats-being-democrats.html

[jeff47]

1. Wait...you mean it isn't 1972 anymore?! Not even 1992?!

(kick)

[Agnosticsherbet]

2. Excellent article by Krugman, that helps explain

to me what is happening in the body politic, though sources for some of his data would have been nice.

Yes, I know the do not provide a bibliography for a column.


I will have to do my own research.

[WillyT]

3. K & R !!!

[hedda_foil]

4. Reagan was elected by a nation in which half the public still disapproved of interracial marriage.

This astounded me so I went to Krugman's link to the data.



Looking back at my parent's generation, and mine as well, of course it's true. Sickeningly true.

[ieoeja]

8. I married a Black woman in '89 and had no idea.

And our wedding was in rural southern Indiana. But it was a Catholic community. We had roughly 300 people from the community show up at our wedding expecting trouble. My dad said there were enough firearms in trunks** to outfit a small army.

[font size=1]** I realize this may be shocking to the gungeon, but there was a time when people did not feel the need to carry firearms at all times. These Catholics, many of the them veterans of the Klan wars, were fully expecting the Klan to showup. Even when they were expecting a fight nobody thought it was appropriate, or necessary, to carry a weapon into the church or reception hall.[/font]

[byronius]

12. I remember those days all too well.

Open racism, violent homophobia, teacher-and-parent-inspired bullying -- it was always in my face until it seemed to recede in the nineties. The chart fits -- big jump '95 to '98.

[hedda_foil]

13. I wonder what happened between '95 and '98 to cause that jump.

There was a great deal of meanness and casual cruelty pervading our society as a whole not very long ago. The teabaggers, birthers and other nutcases, including the fundamentalist xtians, may just represent those who can't or won't let go of that fear and loathing. It seems like their bigotry is what defines them to themselves.

[meow2u3]

5. You mean to tell me Democrats are just starting to act like Democrats instead of GOP-lite?

Well, it's about time Democrats take that sharp left turn we were demanding on DU. Where have they been all these years?

Better late than never.

[Hekate]

6. KnR Krugman

[zentrum]

7. Has Hillary

…..taken a stand as a true Democrat would, as Mr. Krugman points out, on the TPP?

[Hekate]

9. I always find it odd that so many here are so quick to declare who "true Democrats" are. What does

....your question to me have to do with the OP and my KnR for Paul Krugman?

But back to identifying "true Democrats" --- the Party is going to fit in a pup tent by the time all the insufficiently pure are booted out.

[zentrum]

10. Just asking the question the Krugman piece

…….brings to mind as illustrating the core of his argument.

Democrats have, since the Clinton-Gore-Rahm Emamual-From created-DLC cleaved more and more to the "center" and away from a clear contrast with the policies of Republicans. His analysis is that Independents don't really vote for 3rd way candidates—so it's become a losing strategy.

He then says: "So you might as well take a stand for what you believe in."

Since you have a Hillary logo, it seems logical to ask about the contradiction between her wishy-washy stand on the TPP and your K&R.

[byronius]

11. 'attackattackattackattacka'

Dude, you're just winning friends and influencing people.

Excellent irrelevant harassment over a posting member's icon. Just shut that dialog right down. What wisdom! What verve!

You are so helping.

[zentrum]

16. The Krugman piece...

Last edited Wed Jun 17, 2015, 04:14 PM - Edit history (2)

…..is a direct critique of Hillary's entire approach.

It is aimed at undoing her third way. Knowing Krugman, it's in the spirit of saving the election for the good guys (democrats). He is advising her and all double speaking candidates to take their stand.

Yet, my asking a Hillary supporter his/her thinking about why s/he rec's this piece, when Hillary is avoiding taking a stand---is attack? And not just attack, but endless attack? Wow.

Thanks for all the compliments though. I am quite verve-y.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

14. "adopting “centrist” positions in an attempt to attract swing voters is a mug’s game,...

because such voters don’t exist."

Who will inspire the left-leaning independents (hi, Vanilla!) more... Bernie or Hillary or O'Malley? Which candidate will get them to the polls?

[DonCoquixote]

15. Hey Hillary

I still do not like you, but there is one thing you can do that can change me from a skeptic to liking you:

"If I am elected, I have two candidates for Secretary of the Treasury: Joseph Stiglitz, and Paul Krugman."