Is this the end of the Reagan/Rove right?

crackerjack

Well-known member
That Bill Maher joke - yes, joke, by a comedian - is the only class-based slur from a 'liberal' figure I've seen so far (outside blogland). Are there any others?

Many of the more snobbish comments I've read have come from 'oh my god, what have the republicans done?' right-wingers in The Times (see Minette Martin yesterday).
 

vimothy

yurp
Dunno, I'm not really following this very closely, but I think that Crook's central point is well made regardless. Most responses to this on liberal blogs seem to centre on the fact that no one has said anything like that, or that liberals will offer respect to small town America when it deserves it.

You must see the truth in this though:

If only the Democrats could contain ... their consequent distaste for wide swathes of the US electorate, they might gain the unshakeable grip on power they feel they deserve. ...​
 

swears

preppy-kei
You must see the truth in this though:

If only the Democrats could contain ... their consequent distaste for wide swathes of the US electorate, they might gain the unshakeable grip on power they feel they deserve.

But the Republicans are just as guilty of this too, surely? Anyone with the courage of their convictions is going to disagree with "wide swathes" of people on the other side of various positions. Just because someone is "blue collar" or "hard-working" doesn't mean you have to automatically respect every opinion in their head.
 

craner

Beast of Burden
I dunno, I'm not overly worried about her being VP. Dick Cheney had shitloads of experience in executive politics and foreign policy, and look how that turned out.

Apart from Shapiro, every single friend and work colleague I have objects to her violently. And they all have different and inaccurate reasons. A friend of mine said to me in the pub last night, 'one of the things that worries me most about her is that she wants to kill polar bears'.

She what? But wait, have you seen Alaskan polar bears? Hardly the Fox's Glacier Mint bear. Alaska is not Baffin Islnd, you know. They're dirty, murderous, village-invading, pet-snatching motherfuckers. They very probably need culling.
 

vimothy

yurp
But the Republicans are just as guilty of this too, surely? Anyone with the courage of their convictions is going to disagree with "wide swathes" of people on the other side of various positions. Just because someone is "blue collar" or "hard-working" doesn't mean you have to automatically respect every opinion in their head.

You can respect someone and disagree with them. Why are the Reps the party of the working class in the US? Why don't poor people vote for the party that acts in their 'best interest'? I'm not a Dem strategist (or a liberal), but if I was either, I'd want to think pretty hard about this.
 

vimothy

yurp
Fuck polar bears.

And cultural hand grenades are obviously great fun. And McCain now has a bit of initiative. (God but what an awful speech!) But McCain-Palin worries me quite a bit. Maybe I'm overreacting. Obviously, Republicans need to appeal to social conservatives. Palin ticks this box. I'm all for Reps appealing to their core vote (they must!), but still....
 

crackerjack

Well-known member
You can respect someone and disagree with them. Why are the Reps the party of the working class in the US? Why don't poor people vote for the party that acts in their 'best interest'? I'm not a Dem strategist (or a liberal), but if I was either, I'd want to think pretty hard about this.

But the Reps don't respect the Dem base! They turned liberal into a dirty word in the 88 election and it's gone downhill ever since.

Is this reasoned debate?
http://www.conservativemonitor.com/opinion03/52.shtml

http://theyhateamerica.blogspot.com/


The Dems have accused Palin of being unqualified and possibly a hypocrite in her family matters. The GOP's media partners have tried to imply that Obama is a fucking terrorist. That's quite a dis gap.

guiliani, mayor of NYC of all places until recently, was snearing at cosmopolitan democrats in his speech.. Where's the Dem equivalent making speeches about smalltown shitkickers?

And the GOP aren't the party of working class America - they're the party of some working class Americans who value god, flag and country above their own society.
 

zhao

there are no accidents
and this one, a very special number, goes out to Oliver Craner of Dissensus (from my buddy who still has trouble with registration):

I realize you're playing devil's advocate, but seriously? Liberal media? Is that why MSNBC just did what they did with Matthews and Olbermann? How about the fact that the RNC got more coverage than the DNC? What about the naked cheerleading for the Iraq war? And the list goes on. I'm not proposing that they're conservative, either, but corporate through and through.

I'm getting an extra $1200 this week because of Palin, actually, but that doesn't mean my loyalties are up for sale. I'll certainly take the money, but it's a very ill-advised policy. It's the worst sort of government handout, and certainly goes a long way to undermine whatever fiscal conservative bona fides Palin had.

RE: polar bears, yes they kill people. They're polar bears. I have personally been to a village where an attack left a clean-picked skeleton save for the flesh inside the victim's boots. Despite this it's the height of irresponsibility to suggest that polar bear populations need to be culled. The natives have lived with them as part of the fragile(and it is very fragile) ecological balance for thousands of years. Even within the Anchorage area there have been quite a few bear attacks this summer. That's part of living here. My friend who lived on the hillside had a black bear open the sliding door into his house at night, and he was very fortunate that his german shepherd chased it away. Should we kill all the black bears and grizzlies too, then? Shit, moose have even killed people when provoked enough.

Does it bother you at all that Palin fired the Wasilla librarian because she wouldn't ban books? How about her associations with the Alaskan Independence Party?

And what of the fact that she still has yet to give an interview? Sure, she has that softball one with Charlie Gibson coming up but she will still have set a historical record from what I understand. Why would she do this? Oh yeah, because she's from Wasilla, didn't even have a passport until becoming governor and openly admitted as late as several months ago that she didn't even know what the duties of a vice president were.

By the way, I'm speaking as someone who personally had a very limited view of the world until living in a large city outside of Alaska and getting some international travel under my belt. And I'm from Anchorage, which is infinitely cosmopolitan in comparison to Wasilla. When I deal with relatives from small town Alaska who can't even handle taking the bus without help, who don't even know that it's common for rooms on the second floor of a building to be numbered 2xx and hold all sorts of outmoded, reactionary opinions, I shudder to think what a McCain/Palin administration would mean.
 

josef k.

Dangerous Mystagogue
But the Reps don't respect the Dem base! They turned liberal into a dirty word in the 88 election and it's gone downhill ever since.

[...]

The Dems have accused Palin of being unqualified and possibly a hypocrite in her family matters. The GOP's media partners have tried to imply that Obama is a fucking terrorist. That's quite a dis gap.

guiliani, mayor of NYC of all places until recently, was snearing at cosmopolitan democrats in his speech.. Where's the Dem equivalent making speeches about smalltown shitkickers?

And the GOP aren't the party of working class America - they're the party of some working class Americans who value god, flag and country above their own society.

This is exactly right, in my view. There is no "disrespect" gap in American politics, and if there is, the Republican party - the party of hate, fear, and resentment, ever since Nixon - certainly embody it much better then the Democrats.

The Republican strategy in this election is the same as it ever was: in short, they claim, "We stand for American." All Americans that don't fit into their rather narrow conception of what America is about are, by definition, unamerican. People in who live in the cities are cosmopolitans, are rootless, are decadent and without solid values. I don't want to press the point, but these seem to me to represent fascist tropes.

After eight years of Bush - a man who, whatever we happen think of him, has now the lowest approval ratings in US Presidential history - the G.O.P really have no platform to run on: hence, they want to focus this contest on Democratic negatives. They want to say that the Democrats don't respect the heartland, don't value the heartland, are alien to the heartland. It seems to me that this logic of more-or-less paranoid resentment is more-or-less the entirety of their strategy at this point - and perhaps the fundamental reason for the nomination of Sarah Palin in the first place. A candidate so obviously out of her depth that she invites derision from anybody with eyes. A clever move on the part of McCain's strategists, maybe, but a highly political one, and therefore - at least, objectively speaking - an irresponsible one.

But that's all abstract. In the end, I don't know what the best Democratic response to this is. I would say maybe ignoring her - which is in fact pretty much what they've done up to this point - but the Republicans are already replaying the Spiro Agnew strategy and painting the media as a liberal-elitist stalking horse (as Craner nods along) so that might not work. Palin is so patently weak though that to attack her directly looks like picking on her, which is of course, what the Republicans want. To paint themselves as the underdogs, when to all intents and purposes, they still hold control over America.
 

vimothy

yurp
And the GOP aren't the party of working class America - they're the party of some working class Americans who value god, flag and country above their own society.

Sure, and I'm not necessarily disagreeing with the rest of what you say, but the bottom line is if the Democrats are the party who best represent the interests of the majority of Americans, why have the Republicans been so dominant over the last however many decades?*

*EDIT: Actually, I'm not sure. I think that your statement is more of the same...
 
Last edited:

vimothy

yurp
the G.O.P really have no platform to run on: hence, they want to focus this contest on Democratic negatives. They want to say that the Democrats don't respect the heartland, don't value the heartland, are alien to the heartland. It seems to me that this logic of more-or-less paranoid resentment is more-or-less the entirety of their strategy at this point - and perhaps the fundamental reason for the nomination of Sarah Palin in the first place.

True in that the GOP really don't have a platform, but why has this strategy been such a problem for the Dems?

A candidate so obviously out of her depth that she invites derision from anybody with eyes. A clever move on the part of McCain's strategists, maybe, but a highly political one, and therefore - at least, objectively speaking - an irresponsible one.

True again, I think. I am quite worried about Sarah Palin, and now McCain.

Palin is so patently weak though that to attack her directly looks like picking on her, which is of course, what the Republicans want. To paint themselves as the underdogs, when to all intents and purposes, they still hold control over America.

"McCain the Maverick". McCain the fuzzy liberal, though, that's why he (his strategists) picked Palin. And do the Reps still hold control over America? Depends what you mean, doesn't it? I think that the Reps have an understanding of a particular cultural fissure (which is obvious) and that's why they win elections. But the Republicans don't really (literally) control very much at the moment. Other than the Palin nomination, they are pretty fucked.
 

josef k.

Dangerous Mystagogue
True in that the GOP really don't have a platform, but why has this strategy been such a problem for the Dems?

[...]

And do the Reps still hold control over America? Depends what you mean, doesn't it? I think that the Reps have an understanding of a particular cultural fissure (which is obvious) and that's why they win elections. But the Republicans don't really (literally) control very much at the moment. Other than the Palin nomination, they are pretty fucked.

Two good points... What the Republicans do seem to control, I think, is a certain image of what America is, and stands for. Why they control this is a good question. Its clear that Republican media partners enjoy a certain power, on talk radio and Fox News. That said, this power is obviously not absolute, and Fox News itself is intriguingly ambivalent in this election; I suspect because Murdoch thinks that McCain has the words "loser from loserville" written all over him. Obama, furthermore, is soon set to appear on the O'Reilly Factor, following a personal intervention from Murdoch himself!
 

crackerjack

Well-known member
Two good points... What the Republicans do seem to control, I think, is a certain image of what America is, and stands for. Why they control this is a good question. Its clear that Republican media partners enjoy a certain power, on talk radio and Fox News. That said, this power is obviously not absolute, and Fox News itself is intriguingly ambivalent in this election; I suspect because Murdoch thinks that McCain has the words "loser from loserville" written all over him. Obama, furthermore, is soon set to appear on the O'Reilly Factor, following a personal intervention from Murdoch himself!

The NY Post has just come out for McCain.
 

vimothy

yurp
What the Republicans do seem to control, I think, is a certain image of what America is, and stands for.

Yes.

Here's Jim Manzi comparing Palin's speech to William Jennings Bryan's "cross of gold" speech:

Despite its radically different policy conclusions, Palin’s speech reminded me of nothing more than William Jennings Bryan’s famous “Cross of Gold” address to the 1896 Democratic convention. It had, at root, the same wellspring of rhetorical power. We are an almost unimaginably wealthier country now, and our politics has therefore become somewhat more post-materialist. The source of Palin’s defiance is now as much psychological as purely monetary. But the impulse is the same: the small, the rural, the local, and the traditional are mocked when not ignored by the cosmopolitan, coastal mercantile elites. They demand a voice, and assert that they are the bedrock of the country.

As Bryan put it:

…our great cities rest upon our broad and great prairies. Burn down your cities and leave our farms, and your cities will spring up again as if by magic; but destroy our farms, and the grass will grow in the streets of every city of the country.

As Palin put it:

A writer observed: “We grow good people in our small towns, with honesty, sincerity, and dignity.” I know just the kind of people that writer had in mind when he praised Harry Truman.

I grew up with those people.

They are the ones who do some of the hardest work in America who grow our food, run our factories and fight our wars.

They love their country, in good times and bad, and they’re always proud of America. I had the privilege of living most of my life in a small town.

Its clear that Republican media partners enjoy a certain power, on talk radio and Fox News.

It seems to me that the power of Fox News is overstated, or at least that Fox only really has influence to the extent that it tells a story that people want to hear. There are other channels in the US, right?
 

vimothy

yurp
McCain gains:

Sen. John McCain has wiped away many of Sen. Barack Obama's pre-convention advantages, and the race for the White House is now basically deadlocked at 47 percent for Obama and 46 percent for McCain among registered voters, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. The presidential contest is also about even among those who are the most likely to vote in November: 49 percent for McCain, 47 percent for Obama.​
 

craner

Beast of Burden
Respect to Zhao's mysterious Alaskan friend, and I know nothing of the Alaskan polar bear issue myself, just a wildlife documentary I saw years ago about nasty Alaskan polar bears, and I also think that British city-dwelling herring gulls should really be culled. But then I also read this:
Wasilla is the fifth-largest city in Alaska, which meant that Palin was an important player in state politics.

Her husband's status in the Yup'ik Eskimo tribe, of which he is a full, or "enrolled" member, connected her to another influential faction: the large and wealthy (because of their right to oil revenues) native tribes.

All of this gave her a base from which to launch her 2002 campaign for lieutenant (deputy) governor of Alaska.

She lost that, but collected a powerful enough following to be placated with a seat on, and subsequently the chairmanship of, the Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, which launched her into the politics of Alaska's energy industry.

Palin quickly realised that Alaska had the potential to become a much bigger player in global energy politics, a conviction that grew as the price of oil rose. Alaska had been in hock to oil companies since major production began in the mid-1970s.

As with most poor, distant places that suddenly receive great natural-resource wealth, the first generation of politicians were mesmerised by the magnificence of the crumbs falling from the table. Palin was the first of the next generation to realise that Alaska should have a place at that table.

Her first target was an absurd bureaucratic tangle that for 30 years had kept the state from exporting its gas to the other 48 states. She set an agenda that centred on three mutually supportive objectives: cleaning up state politics, building a new gas pipeline, and increasing the state's share of energy revenues.

This agenda, pursued throughout Palin's commission tenure, culminated in her run for governor in 2006. By this time, she had already begun rooting out corruption and making enemies, but also establishing her bona fides as a reformer.

And it still sounds impressive, whatever the politics. The idea she's incompetent or a naif untested in executive politics seems frankly absurd.
 

DWD

Well-known member
And it still sounds impressive, whatever the politics. The idea she's incompetent or a naif untested in executive politics seems frankly absurd.

Oh, I don't know.

I suppose it depends what standards of competence and experience you expect of a vice-presidential candidate. And it's difficult to judge her in that respect until the McCain campaign allows her to take questions from the press - so far, of course, they've only allowed her to make a scripted speech at the convention and to deliver rote-learned stump speeches on the campaign trail.

We can only speculate as to why they're doing that. Rick Davis has said they're keeping her away from the media until journalists are ready to treat her with "respect and deference". Now, personally, I think Davis was lying about that. I think they're keeping her out of the spotlight because she knows fuck-all about domestic and foreign policy and they don't want her on prime-time making remarks like "I've been so focused on state government, I haven't really focused much on the war in Iraq" or, more recently, her claim that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had "gotten too big and too expensive to the taxpayers".

But who knows, really? Maybe she knows the issues inside-out and the campaign really is just keeping her out of the spotlight because they think journalists are being nasty.

All we really have to go on, then, is her past record - like the years she spent as mayor of Wasilla. During her term, she increased spending by 63% and long-term debt rose from zero to $22 million (which is more or less equal to the town's entire annual budget). Most of that debt was raised via bond issues to pay for Palin's pet project - a $14 million sports centre for the town's 6k inhabitants.

The WSJ has written a good piece about how competently Palin handled the building of that sports centre:

Palin's Hockey Rink Leads To Legal Trouble in Town She Led
By MICHAEL M. PHILLIPS
September 6, 2008; Page A5

WASILLA, Alaska -- The biggest project that Sarah Palin undertook as mayor of this small town was an indoor sports complex, where locals played hockey, soccer, and basketball, especially during the long, dark Alaskan winters.

The only catch was that the city began building roads and installing utilities for the project before it had unchallenged title to the land. The misstep led to years of litigation and at least $1.3 million in extra costs for a small municipality with a small budget. What was to be Ms. Palin's legacy has turned into a financial mess that continues to plague Wasilla.

"It's too bad that the city of Wasilla didn't do their homework and secure the land before they began construction," said Kathy Wells, a longtime activist here. "She was not your ceremonial mayor; she was in charge of running the city. So it was her job to make sure things were done correctly."

Ms. Palin, now Alaska's governor and Republican Sen. John McCain's running mate, has pointed to her two terms as Wasilla's mayor, from 1996 to 2002, as evidence that she has enough executive experience to take on the presidency, should the need arise -- more than Democratic Sen. Barack Obama, who touts his own background as a community organizer in Chicago.

"I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a community organizer, except that you have actual responsibilities," Ms. Palin said Wednesday in her acceptance speech at the Republican convention.

Litigation resulting from the dispute over Ms. Palin's sports-complex project is still in the courts, with the land's former owner seeking hundreds of thousands of additional dollars from the city.

Hockey is much loved in Wasilla, and Ms. Palin, whose son was a star player, wanted to build an indoor rink, with a track, basketball courts and soccer field. In the late 1990s, the city sought a 145-acre parcel owned by the Nature Conservancy, which wanted to sell the land to buy more environmentally sensitive property elsewhere. City officials negotiated a price of $126,000. Months passed without the city's securing a signed purchase agreement, according to the city's attorney, Tom Klinkner of Birch, Horton, Bittner & Cherot.

At the same time, Gary Lundgren, a Fairbanks real-estate investor, was in talks with the Nature Conservancy to buy a larger adjacent property. As discussions between the environmental group and the city dragged on, Mr. Lundgren said, he purchased the entire site for about $1 million.

The city sued Mr. Lundgren and the Nature Conservancy, arguing that Wasilla had had a deal. In 2001, a federal district court judge ruled in Wasilla's favor. Mr. Lundgren appealed, but the city believed it would prevail, according to Mr. Klinkner.

Ms. Palin marched ahead, making the public case for a sales-tax increase and $14.7 million bond issue to pay for the sports center, which was to feature a running track, basketball courts and a hockey rink. At the time, the city's annual budget was about $20 million. In a March 2002 referendum, residents approved the mayor's plan by a 20-vote margin, 306 to 286. The city cleared roads, installed utilities and made preparations to build.

Later that year, Ms. Palin's final one as mayor, the federal judge reversed his own decision and ruled that the property rightfully belonged to Mr. Lundgren. Wasilla had never signed the proper papers, the court ruled.

Mr. Lundgren said he had offered to give smaller parcels to the city free of charge, but the city held out for a larger tract. The former chief of the city finance department, Ted Leonard, says he doesn't recall such an offer.

After Ms. Palin left office, the city decided to take 80 acres of Mr. Lundgren's property through eminent domain. An Alaska court confirmed the city's right to do so and ordered that an arbitrator determine the appropriate price.

Last year, the arbitrator ordered the city to pay $836,378 for the 80-acre parcel, far more than the $126,000 Wasilla originally thought it would pay for a piece of land 65 acres larger. The arbitrator also determined that the city owed Mr. Lundgren $336,000 in interest. Wasilla's legal bill since the eminent domain action has come to roughly $250,000 so far, according to Mr. Klinkner, the city attorney.

Mr. Lundgren has appealed the decision, arguing that the arbitrator should have awarded him more interest. "It has been 10 years; it's just insane," said Mr. Lundgren, who now lives in Panama. "All [Ms. Palin] had to do was close the transaction."

The McCain-Palin campaign referred questions about the sports complex to Mr. Leonard, the former city finance chief. He blamed the Nature Conservancy for dealing with two different potential buyers at one time. "That's what caused the confusion," he said.

"At the time, with the information she had, [Ms. Palin] made the right decision," Mr. Leonard said. "But you know what? Litigation happens."

The sports facility is finished, set against forest and mountain ranges. Inside, locals kick soccer balls and skate laps on the rink. Last year, it hosted a statewide wrestling tournament.

"All I can say about the sports complex is that it was done on time and under budget," said Donald Moore, a Palin ally who managed the construction. "It was done legally, and for someone else to say it could have been done differently in a better way, that's strictly their opinion."

Ms. Palin cited her mayoral duties as partial evidence of her executive experience. Dianne Woodruff, a Wasilla city councilwoman and critic of Ms. Palin's performance, agreed.

"If people are going to be voting on her based on her experience as Wasilla's mayor, then they should know how she did in the job," Ms. Woodruff said, "the good, the bad and the ugly."

But is she qualified to run for VP? I suppose we'll find that out when she's allowed to give unscripted answers to questions about policy. Maybe that'll be sometime soon. Maybe it won't. I suppose it depends on how quickly she's able to take in all the information the McCain team is throwing at her. Or - alternatively - on how quickly journalists are able to learn respect and deference.
 

vimothy

yurp
We can only speculate as to why they're doing that. Rick Davis has said they're keeping her away from the media until journalists are ready to treat her with "respect and deference". Now, personally, I think Davis was lying about that. I think they're keeping her out of the spotlight because she knows fuck-all about domestic and foreign policy and they don't want her on prime-time making remarks like "I've been so focused on state government, I haven't really focused much on the war in Iraq" or, more recently, her claim that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had "gotten too big and too expensive to the taxpayers".

There's no need to speculate. The McCain team have said as much explicitly, with Douglas Holtz-Eakin (McCain's chief economic adviser) joking -- because Palin has to be so extensively briefed on policy -- that "McCain? That guy's on his own!"
 
Top