NYT: Nutroots could wreck Dems’ ability to govern effectively
posted at 11:32 pm on November 18, 2006 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Either the monster will wreck their village or the DLC will chase it into a mill and burn the damn thing down. Or both. However it plays out, good news for us:
Twelve years ago, the Democratic Party was still captive to a series of single-issue interest groups — big labor, the environmental lobby, civil rights groups — that pressured the party to pursue their own parochial agendas, making it difficult to challenge some liberal orthodoxies. These groups still matter on Capitol Hill, of course, but since Bush’s election they have been giving way to a new array of powerful actors: MoveOn.org, liberal philanthropists, crusading bloggers. These new forces don’t care so much about litmus-test policies, but they are adamant about confronting the president. The influence of the netroots, as the growing Web-based Democrats have come to be called, is likely to stifle any inclination toward compromise or creativity, making it difficult for Democrats to transition from an opposition party to a governing one. Thoughtful and dynamic leadership, after all, requires a willingness to negotiate and a tolerance for dissent — which is the main reason that Republicans now find themselves glumly packing boxes rather than gleefully packing the courts.
If and when they do screw up, what’ll replace them? Republicans? Or some as yet uncreated political chimera stitched together from various left- and right-wing issues? A new, hybrid ideology. A Frankenstein — but in a good way!
[T]hese two waves are more accurately viewed as part of the same continuous seismic disturbance: the growing frustration of voters with the Washington crowd of both parties, who seem stuck in the same ideological debate they were having in 1975, while the rest of the country struggles mightily with the emerging economic and international threats of 2006. After the midterms, that tidal resentment has now washed away both of our old governing philosophies: the expansive and often misguided liberalism that dominated American politics up through the 1970s, as well as the impractical, mean-spirited brand of conservatism that rose up in reaction to it.
It may be, then, that we have just witnessed the last big election of the 20th century; the question now is what kind of different, more relevant ideologies might rise from the ruins. Or, as Simon Rosenberg, the Democratic strategist, recently put it in making much the same argument, “Like two heavyweight boxers stumbling into the 15th round of a championship fight, the two great ideologies of the 20th century stumble, exhausted, tattered and weakened, into a very dynamic and challenging 21st century.” The era of baby-boomer politics — with its culture wars, its racial subtext, its archaic divisions between hawks and doves and between big government and no government at all — is coming to a merciful close. Our elections may become increasingly generational rather than ideological — and not a moment too soon.
Exit question: who will lead this magical, third-way, RINO/DINO jamboree? If the media’s messiah isn’t willing to, I mean.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Correction its not “Netroots” its “NUTROOTS”
William Amos on November 18, 2006 at 11:39 PM
Allah,
Do you draw hazard pay for NYT work?
a4g on November 18, 2006 at 11:42 PM
This would be humorous if it weren’t so serious for our country. No doubt, the next couple of years will be entertaining as the creeps in the wings of the democratic party start to demand payback. Their single common bond (a raging hatred of George Bush) quickly turns to dust when confronted with the real issues this country - and this Congress - actually face. The Nutroots will absolutely wreck the Dems’ ability to govern effectively as they begin making demands reflecting their bizzare ideology. Watch for the Democratic leadership to start putting distance between itself and the likes of Kos, Soros, and other far-left organizations. Then watch those organizations start to pick the party apart as they begin to feel increasingly marginalized as a political force. It will happen.
thedecider on November 18, 2006 at 11:44 PM
This is news all of a sudden? The nutroots are so far out of the mainstram they are sunning on a rock…basking the warmth of global warming!
SouthernGent on November 18, 2006 at 11:48 PM
Listening to Led Zeppelin I in headphones will enhance your ability to comprehend this thread.
infidel4life on November 18, 2006 at 11:56 PM
Markos Zuniga, subversive. Isn’t it interesting that the GOP is vilified by the left for consorting with evangelicals, but they consort with the Nutroots and nary a negative word is spoken by their own kind (which includes the media). If you play with fire you should expect to get burned. If you consort with the Nutroots you should expect to, well, get burned.
The Nutroots are Swiftboating the Democrats!!
Bellicose Muse on November 19, 2006 at 12:00 AM
Clue: The Nutroots are Dazed and Confused.
infidel4life on November 19, 2006 at 12:05 AM
The story of Faust was written by Gõthe, Gounod, Marlowe, and now by the DNC. The question is who will be cast as Satan? The choices are so many.
DAT60A3 on November 19, 2006 at 12:05 AM
I wonder if the country’s past the time when a new party can be viably formed?
I’m reading Team of Rivals right now about Lincoln, and the stuff about the formation of the Republican Party is extremely enlightening. It was a Frankenstein, created after a few factions had already split off over things like, um, immigration, when the Whigs wouldn’t go far enough on slavery.
But the real question is: whose turn would it be to form the new party and what would the rallying issue be? The venomous hatred of the far left for everything Bush has, in the end, proven a weak reed for anything as momentous as the formation of a serious challenging party. I shudder to think what that issue is going to have to be to make it happen. I don’t think it will.
Aside: did he really just call conservatism “impractical?” ??
Anwyn on November 19, 2006 at 12:07 AM
PS what the hell is a generational election?
Anwyn on November 19, 2006 at 12:08 AM
YIKES…so the NYT’s realizes the win was because many of the elected Dems ran as conservatives, and the nutroots really is a problem?
Good luck with that NYT’s…and I am sure your email boxes is flooded, Lucky that the NYT’’s isn’t as transparent as the WAPO…NYT’s would a delete comment problem of their hands.
Topsecretk9 on November 19, 2006 at 12:09 AM
would “HAVE” a delete
Topsecretk9 on November 19, 2006 at 12:10 AM
Very Interesting. I can’t wait till 2008 to make an educated guess on the pathway of the GOP. Right now, we are still recovering from our wounds–the recent election. Democrats claim that Bush does not listen to the Generals. I hope that they will listen after Gen John Abizaid suggested that withdrawing the troops will do more harm than good. We’ll see how that turns out in 2007. The minimum wage crisis is still lingering. Will congress increase the minimum wage? My main concern is who are those that are against it. Will there be increase in outsourcing of jobs due to the passage of that law? We are going to see how that plays out. Lou Dobbs have been freaking out about outsourcing. He almost seem to blame the republican party for the problem. Democrats claim that they can solve the problem. We’ll see the results of their action. You guys should check out this article on immigration
Will Amnesty be a solution? The clock is ticking slowly, yet everybody is still vigilant. Dems is not over yet. On 2008, we’ll look to this moment.
Ouabam on November 19, 2006 at 12:47 AM
Jaibones on November 19, 2006 at 1:26 AM
The Left will do unto themselves as no one else can. Again we find foundation to this concusion. The issue is not whether they can govern but how long before rational America recognizes the Left for what it really is.
I say again, we should take advantage of this opportunity to set the conditions for a return of rational and clear thinking representation to our Federal government. We should give the electorate a clear and well defined alternative to the Left with polite conduct and behavior, clear thinking and rational thought that makes sense, and have developed a basis for trust.
If there was one thing the right could do to improve their advantage it is to directly address the issue of favoring corporations and the wealthy at the expense of the electorate and the Nation. This is one topic that I would love to see addressed on Hot Air to great degree and could prove valuable at this time.
omegaram on November 19, 2006 at 1:34 AM
The NY Slimes are already lining up the excuses for a failed Democrat Congress? They must have a lot of confidence in them to do so before the libs even take control.
Over at Digg the kiddies seem to feel the same way as they look for excuses for why the first 100 hours will be a complete sham. As it now seems that no one had a real good reason to vote in last Novembers elections I wonder why they did so anyway. Free bread and circuses, or maybe there wasn’t anything worth watching on tv that day.
DannoJyd on November 19, 2006 at 2:03 AM
“…and to say to the moment: “Oh stay! You are so beautiful!”
Entelechy on November 19, 2006 at 2:06 AM
This might give me pause for concern, if it weren’t merely more of the same b.s. we’ve been hearing since before the Dems even won the election. “Oh, God, it’s going to be terrible! The liberals and the DLC will be strangling one another on the floor of the House! Howard Dean and James Carville will be covered in blood and beating one another into bloody pulps! YARRRRRR”
Yeah, that’s wonderful. Let me know when it actually happens and the speculation becomes reality. Last time I checked, I don’t remember seeing any large number of liberals threatening to leave the party on the eve of its victory over the Republicans. I do remember, however, and am witness to recurring instances of this every day, Republicans across every right-wing blog and forum on the net threatening to pull a Perot and jump ship over the soon-to-be-signed amnesty bill Bush will undoubtedly cooperate with the Democrats over that will slowly legalize 20 million new Democratic voters. Hell, then there’s the minimum wage hike and any other number of bills he might compromise on. Face it, the wingnuts in your party are only going to get angrier as time goes on, because Bush has to compromise on everything from taxes to judges to the minimum wage to immigration (well, he wanted that one anyway).
All this talk about Democrats imploding? Looks like the GOP is imploding to me, right on the eve of a massive, blanket amnesty. So, what’s going to happen first? Democrats implode over the “netroots”, Republicans implode over immigration, or Republicans and Democrats simultaneously implode while Democrats are refueled by 20 million new voters and thus it is balanced out, or Republicans imploding while Democrats remain unified while receiving 20 million new voters, or Dick Cheney shoots Karl Rove in the face for pissing it all away?
If the Republicans implode, you lose
If the Democrats implode, nothing changes, because we’re getting new voters
If Republicans implode while Democrats buff up their ranks with 20 million new voters, we own this country for 20 years
I like those odds.
Grebrook on November 19, 2006 at 2:29 AM
“…and to say to the moment: “Oh stay! You are so beautiful!”
Entelechy on November 19, 2006 at 2:38 AM
trolls are so tiresome
urbancenturion on November 19, 2006 at 4:04 AM
Grebrook the troll has made another attempt to hijack a thread by creating a straw man argument.
The topic is how the nutroots are going to undermine the ability of the Democrats to govern by their payback demands and demands of ideological purity, not how the Republican party is might implode over minimum wage and other issues.
The fact is, the ‘nutroots’ are the “Brownshirt Party’s” backbone. And they are going to be upset when they don’t get their way.
The centrist “wiser heads” of the party will not be able to constrain them, because the nutroots now feel “entitled” to control the direction of the party, even though they really didn’t earn it.
All of us just lived through an election where the winners lied their way into power. They lied about the war, the economy, the unemployment, taxation, gun control. You name it, the Democrats lied about it, and the chief liars have been the trolls like Grebrook at DU and DKOS and their allies in the media.
Now that they won, they face the problem of governing, and the nutroot contingent will prevent that from happening.
No amount of spin from the trolls (like Grebrook) posting here will change this, because the nature of brownshirts brooks no compromise.
georgej on November 19, 2006 at 7:07 AM
Bill Frist was a top-tier candidate?
The writer might be dumber that Grebrook.
JammieWearingFool on November 19, 2006 at 8:28 AM
Well, ok, but let’s not underestimate the damage they’ve done and still do to the Republican party. Be afraid, be very afraid. They’re not done, and wont turn on the Democrats until there are no more Republicans.
Obama does not have what it takes (nor the will) to start another party as the last note suggests. I can see Steele forming such a party (left in the cold). Consider other black “reasonables” like Lynn Swan and influentials like Russel Simmons. In such a party Liberman and Swartzenegger, even Guiliani would add a lot of potential.
Potential is the word for it. When, why, how did the Republicans became a “conservative party” (Democrats/MSM definition of course)? I don’t know that means anymore.
I do not like that we have a $7 Trillion debt (like having an income of $100k and $700K on credit). I do not like having a trade deficit with countries that get away with restricting our imports. I do not like buying mid-east oil (given the givens) when we have enough corn and coal of our own. I do not like that our “friends” oppose our GM food for Africa, in order to preserve their economies, and hurt our image. I think we have enough immigrants from Mexico. I prefer to be taxed when I spend my money, not when I earn it. I don’t think houses that cost $100K to build should be flipped for $300K so factories close down and outsource to India.
Am I a Libertarian? Should I become an Independent?
These are questions that we must ask. Otherwise we risk becoming vicious partisans like the Democrats. Abortion? Stem Cells? Kyoto? No brainers - for communicators.
Agrippa2k on November 19, 2006 at 10:01 AM
And so it begins.
thedecider on November 19, 2006 at 11:59 AM
Comparing your opponents to Nazis and Fascists is a sign of a weak mind. Sorry, but you really are pathetic if that’s all you can come up with.
Keep dreaming. Democrats won and we will govern effectively by bending Bush to compromise on anything we want so long as we hold the power to include our demands in military spending bills that he doesn’t dare veto.
There will be nothing left of your party going into 2008 because of all of the idiots whining about immigration jumping ship when Bush gives out amnesty.
Grebrook on November 19, 2006 at 12:06 PM
Grebrook: “you really are pathetic…”
I stopped reading your “message” at this point.
Now be a good little troll and find a bridge to live under.
georgej on November 19, 2006 at 12:11 PM
It appears that the new Senate Majority leader is going to give the Democrats a bit of payback. File this under “do unto others….”
Between the nutroots and the Republicans, the Democratic Party’s time in control of the Senate will be short. The nutroots and the leftwing lobbying groups (PFAW, NARAL, etc.) will, no doubt, demand that conservative judges be blocked. And McConnell will pull the trigger on everything else.
As the proverb says: “Be careful what you wish for, because you might get it!”
georgej on November 19, 2006 at 12:46 PM
No one is imploding.
If you want to use California as a litmus test, then the trend is away from both parties. Most new voters are registering independent.
The Republican party faces the problem of its most loyal, dogmatic “vote for anything with an R next to the name” voting block is going to die soon. Their children and younger conservatives foolishly believe that the Republican party should actually stand for small government, fiscal responsibility, and national interests first. *gasps*. So the Hispanic strategy is what they are trying and pissing of their real future voting block. The schism is being fueld by the ol’d boys club trying to stay in power.
The Democrats are trying to push amnesty and again courting the Hispanic strategy, alienating a great many Democratic voters. They have to contend with freshman Democrats that were elected via Republican dissatisfaction and ran on conservative issues. Their schism is from the bottom up, how do they appease their major contributors and primary voters while holding onto power?
The politcal realignment will be the uber liberals losing power and the RINO’s being cast down. If the old ideologues try and stay in power we could see more than one minority party putting both parties centrist votes in major jeopardy. I doubt the Libertarians will capitalize, althogh they are getting more press than ever, they just whine way too much. So to the exit question I have no idea.
A Republican going independent over immigration could be a ralliny cry. I know he would get some of my money instantly.
*Shrug*
Theworldisnotenough on November 19, 2006 at 1:38 PM
Simple addition is a fine tool, of course, but only when used thoughtfully. Its pervasive problem is that it requires immense simplification. For one thing, it requires interchangeable units, which are not always available. In the present case, one sees immediately that Mexicans are not “fuel,” and not interchangeable with American Democrats (or Republicans). Individually, they are people, with minds of their own. They are also Mexicans, and it’s best to inquire and consider carefully whatever that may mean. Just to get one started, consider: Are Mexicans more famous for their environmentalism or their feminism?
Another way in which simple addition invites forgetfulness is through its requirement that its units be static. Yet I can’t imagine that so large a change as the addition of “20 million” Mexican voters to the rolls will be simply without consequences among the 100-200 million Americans already on the rolls.
To give just one example, I’m reminded how threatened one of my black coworkers seemed to feel when she first learned, two years ago, that hispanics had overtaken blacks as the largest American racial minority. She acted as if some birthright had been taken away from her. One ought to be careful not to treat my black coworker as an interchangeable or static unit; she’s a real person with real feelings. I don’t know how she’ll take the news of “amnesty” for “20 million” Mexican immigrants; it’ll be interesting to see.
Kralizec on November 19, 2006 at 1:46 PM
I’m sorry, I must live on a different planet from the NYT’s Mr. Bai.
I don’t see such new alignments.
“archaic divisions between hawks and doves”? There may be a few greybeards in attendance, but the efforts to drive the military from America’s colleges - and now high schools - are being led by quite youngish folk.
“racial subtext”? The last time I saw a black person say that racism was worse now than in the ’50’s because it’s hidden - that person was well south of 40.
And there are tons of college age people whose main issue is “a woman’s right to obtain health care”.
Who is this “rest of the country struggl(ing) mightily with the emerging economic and international threats” in this “dynamic and challenging 21st century”? Is he refering to the fact that it is impossible to rule out a strong Gore candidacy in ‘08 to save the world from its real enemy - global warming?
One of the big differences today is that the struggles of the late 60’s involved trying to make the American Dream open to all. Now - by what seems a politial “critical mass” of people - the American Dream is argued to be a useless lie, and that we need to move immediately in the direction of pacifist, socialist (and soon to tumble into the dustbin of history) Europe.
To me, it doesn’t look like the nutrooting of the Dems is necessarily “good news for us”. Allegely a third of the population believes the Government had something to do with 9/11. And many of those Truthers vote.
If the Ship of State starts sinking from neglect, sabotage or outright attack, just because there are some adults around doesn’t mean there will be enough of them to keep things afloat, or even that they will be called upon to do so.
Now this is putting the argument somewhat in the extreme, but you get my drift.
eeyore on November 19, 2006 at 1:59 PM
20th Century? Huh? When did time travel become a reality. I thought this was the 21st Century…I’d better check out my calendar. Be back!
sharinlite on November 19, 2006 at 3:08 PM
I don’t think that BDS will die, or “turn to dust” with the end of the Bush Administration. The folks the Kos-ites, the MoveON-ites and others in the nutroots nation are so deranged about aren’t Mr. Bush and his merry band of career apparachniks…it’s *US*.
The entity that these Lefty’s hate — and I do mean *HATE* — is any “discouraging word”. They own the moral high ground, by gum, and anyone who points out that the Emperor — them — is nekkid is a heretic, and shall be burned.
Look at that poxy program put forth by the “Spartacus Youth Club/League/Clique/Gaggle” in the “reaction to the tazering on UCLA” thread. Tone it down a turn, take out some of the “pet issues”, and it’s a photo-negative of what the folks out here in “fly-over country” believe…and its those “rubes”, “hayseeds” and “peasants” (and I don’t mean this in a good, proletarian way) that these jerks in the nutroots movement despise.
The nutroots denizens think in imperatives. They may not write and each sentence with an exclamation point, as if to say “NOW!”, but they mean just that. They’ve got their foot in the door, they feel, although the nutroots contributed little besides some money to the last election…and, had they been more organized and more able to communicate, so’s the electorate might’ve had a better idea of what and whom they support, they’d've more than neutralized any contributions they’d made.
The nutroots will thwart and trip up — not just try to thwart and trip up — the Democratic establishment because even the most Lefty of them will show their American face to the Left…and America is the enemy. It’s one thing to mouth constitutional priciples in an election year, it’s another to try to abide by them. The nutroots guys want nothing to do with the Constitution, I believe. They want it all their way, now, and you’d better be quick about it.
These folks are totalitarians, and they won’t get what they want now from the Democrats, and that will be the ruin of the party: their party wants its agenda now or heads will roll.
…mind you, many on the Right are just the same way. No compromises. Totalitarian on abortion, the border, the War, taxation, social issues, all with good reasons…any compromise being weakness.
Ideological purity is for angels, not mere men.
Puritan1648 on November 19, 2006 at 3:24 PM
This coming from a conservative, when conservatives have spent the last six months threatening to leave the GOP because they didn’t deport illegal immigrants or ban all forms of abortion? Yeah, you’ve got a lot of room to talk there, tough guy. In fact, weren’t you one of the fanatics doing exactly that, on this blog, along with Allah and 90% of the posters here? “We’re done with the GOP! They want amnesty! It’s third party time!”
Pot, meet kettle. “How do you do?” “Fine, sir.”
Grebrook on November 19, 2006 at 3:50 PM
One of the most demeaning statements about immigrants. You must really believe that we (all immigrants) are lemmings or sheep.
Entelechy on November 19, 2006 at 4:25 PM
This from the NYSlimes.First, he really does try to blame Pres Bush for the Hurricane Katrina and NOKO’s nuclear bomb experiment/test. Second, is he and the Times so absolutely dense/stupid that they put a weather phenomena above the WAR ON TERROR WORLDWIDE when mentioning “emerging threats”?
Unable to respond? I really thought the article was about to define the Dems but it was a Kerry’d (botched) statement about looking in the mirror. The Times and the left and the Dems are the kings of non-responders.
It goes on…’More interested in being right than in being reasonable‘ …if that doesn’t describe the Dems in office, I dont know what does.
IF the country actually reads enough of this, and is aware enough to SEE it for what it is, the nutroots will destroy all hope of a useful Dem governing body.
shooter on November 19, 2006 at 5:01 PM
Been dazed and confused for so long it’s not true.
Wanted a woman, never bargained for you.
Lots of people talk and few of them know,
soul of a woman was created below.
It’s best if you’re buzzing on Colombian gold …
Ali-Bubba on November 19, 2006 at 5:28 PM
One of the most demeaning statements about immigrants. You must really believe that we (all immigrants) are lemmings or sheep.
It’s the only drum he really likes to beat, so yeah, I guess he does believe immigrants are ’sheeple.’
Interesting, though, that Grebrook’s belief in long-term Democratic dominance is not based in policy ideas or that party’s ability to attract voters with compelling arguments. No, it’s all based in his belief that the Democrats will “ram an amnesty bill down our throats” (his words, not mine) and start registering all the new Americans as voters.
Grebrook longs for the days of Tammany Hall, it seems.
Slublog on November 19, 2006 at 7:20 PM
Whoops. The first sentence above should have been a quote.
Slublog on November 19, 2006 at 7:20 PM
Yeah, I definitely get your meaning. But you know, I still believe those of us in “fly-over country” have the last word and really are the final authority. The Nuts on the left (and right) always move to the middle once in office. They have no choice. Why do you think that is? I believe it’s because the middle is the majority, and majority still rules in this country. I won’t argue that the fringes will try to push their agenda’s (Hillarycare, etc…), but those dreams are dashed once their power is threatened. By the way (just an aside) why do you respond to that jerk? He’s just baiting you and as soon as you nail him he’ll change the subject because he has no ‘leg to stand on’. It’s so not worth wasting any time over.
thedecider on November 19, 2006 at 10:42 PM
Sublog wrote: “Grebrook longs for the days of Tammany Hall, it seems.”
Grebrook the troll longs for the days when his opinion mattered. And when we gave a damn.
georgej on November 20, 2006 at 12:55 AM