Elite Democrats Lose

[susankh4]

""That is part of the price Hillary Clinton is paying in this primary: The party's liberal-elite side resents Bill's performance, especially his move to the right after winning the White House but then losing Congress in 1994.

Clinton did it to survive. But Kerry, Gore or even George W. Bush would never have compromised that way, because their elite upbringing does not allow them to think that way.

Compare this with two modern presidents who are widely remembered and admired: William Jefferson Clinton and Ronald Wilson Reagan.

Neither came from or had access to the elite system, though at times they brushed against it; when push came to shove, they rejected it for their own survival. Both deeply wanted people to like them because of their upbringings -- both came from poor families in small-town America with abusive, alcoholic fathers.

Democrats will be successful in November only if they pick a candidate who mirrors the successful tickets that won the 2006 midterm elections -- candidates who connected with average Americans.

If the candidate who emerges from this primary season echoes the liberal elitism of McGovern, Dukakis, Gore and Kerry, then Democrats should start bracing for a losing year, one they should have easily won.""



http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/04/elite_democrats_historically_los.html

[NJmaverick]

1. The true elite are the party elite that is forcing Hillary upon us

The PEOPLE want Obama, that's the difference.

[Clear Blue Sky]

2. Exactly.

Who should pick the nominee? The people or the party elites?

[Kitty Herder]

9. That's the truth.

[bemildred]

3. Democrats that have nothing to say about substantive issues lose. nt

[Joe Chi Minh]

6. Precisely. It is no exaggeration to say that the Republicans are a fringe party,

and have been since at least Bill Clinton's presidency.

[angstlessk]

4. to me they are using the word elite as code for liberal...or populist

they cannot say they are too liberal, since we have rescued that word, now it is 'elite'...hell, I would rather have an 'elite' progressive, liberal, populist, than a non 'elite' regressive or, heaven forbid!!! a republican!!

[Joe Chi Minh]

7. Spot on.

[Two Americas]

10. that may be

Sure, they - the Republicans - use the word "elite" to good advantage against all Democrats. But it would be simple minded to say that they are "wrong" and then leave it at that. There is no harm in asking ourselves why that is an effective tool to use against us. They don't use "elite" as code for "liberal," nor "populist," they use it as code for arrogant city slicker, for academic intellectual, for PETA, for "organic," for bike riding - for the faction on the left that has taken control of the party and that is more interested in having a culture war with the right wingers over issues that have little to do with politics, rather than to fight for the traditional principles and ideals of the party.

[Jade Fox]

5. Reagan revisionism is the only reason he's "admired".....

and canonized now. He was NOT much admired by the time he left office. The right-wing pundits have devoted a couple of decades to creating the Reagan Mythology, and ignoring what he really did.

I was remembering (after paying to fill my car with gas) how President Carter took alternative energy developement seriously. Then Reagan came a long and killed all those programs. Now we're paying the price. Gee, thanks Saint Ronnie!!

[Doctor_J]

8. The MSM portrays all of our party as elite

So what?