Monday, September 08, 2008

FT's Clive Crook explains Democrat''s genius for losing elections

David Seaton's News Links
In tune with some of the things we have been talking about for the last few days, I wanted to share an article from the Financial Times columnist Clive Crook with you. Crook, who has been very supportive of Obama for most of the campaign so far, has some very interesting observations about the Democratic genius for losing elections. Here are some excerpts from his column:
This article is not the first to note the cultural contradiction in American liberalism, but just now the point bears restating. The election may turn on it. Democrats speak up for the less prosperous; they have well-intentioned policies to help them; they are disturbed by inequality, and want to do something about it. Their concern is real and admirable. The trouble is, they lack respect for the objects of their solicitude. Their sympathy comes mixed with disdain, and even contempt.

Democrats regard their policies as self-evidently in the interests of the US working and middle classes. Yet those wide segments of US society keep helping to elect Republican presidents. How is one to account for this? Are those people idiots? Frankly, yes – or so many liberals are driven to conclude.(...) Because it was so unexpected, Sarah Palin’s nomination for the vice-presidency jolted these attitudes to the surface. Ms Palin is a small-town American. It is said that she has only recently acquired a passport. Her husband is a fisherman and production worker. She represents a great slice of the country that the Democrats say they care about – yet her selection induced an apoplectic fit.

For days, the derision poured down from Democratic party talking heads and much of the media too. The idea that “this woman” might be vice-president or even president was literally incomprehensible. The popular liberal comedian Bill Maher, whose act is an endless sneer at the Republican party, noted that John McCain’s case for the presidency was that only he was capable of standing between the US and its enemies, but that should he die he had chosen “this stewardess” to take over. This joke was not – or not only – a complaint about lack of experience. It was also an expression of class disgust. I give Mr Maher credit for daring to say what many Democrats would only insinuate.(...) Voters in small towns and suburbs, forever mocked and condescended to by metropolitan liberals, are attuned to this disdain. Every four years, many take their revenge.(...) The Palin nomination could still misfire for Mr McCain, but the liberal reaction has made it a huge success so far. To avoid endlessly repeating this mistake, Democrats need to learn some respect.
It is ironic that, among leading Democrats the only one who seems to fully understand what Crook is driving at is the born aristocrat Howard Dean. DS


Anonymous said...

good article.


Anna said...

I don't think that Hillary has dissed Sarah.

RC said...

Frankly, I'm of the opinion that the US electorate have gotten and are getting the government they deserve, in the aggregate. There is a large deficit of critical thinking in the US, and it covers the spectrum from Congresspersons to street sweepers.
A top to bottom view of the current Government Sponsored Enterprises {formerly Fannie and Freddie before Monday} dog and pony show, indicates just how deluded and how easy to delude the population is.
US citizens, again, in the aggregate, are pathetic, and blaming the Democrats for getting the sense of that is hardly a way out. Obama said the other day, in answer to the RNC rants and preaching to the choir that went on last week, that the Republicans think the electorate is stupid.
Well, excuse me, but the basic Rovian Credo is that the majority of the voters are idiotic. He and I can agree on that.