Comments on: Power to the people

By: Anon

Anon — Wed, 09 Feb 2005 21:19:37 +0000

So Steve you are apparently pissing on my father who served in WWII, and my grandfather-in-law, who also served as insane. Fuck you.

By: MQ

MQ — Tue, 08 Feb 2005 23:23:21 +0000

I think abb1 is right (and by extension Thorley too, at least partially). My own reading of the public opinion evidence is that the majority of hte public supports the Dems on a wide range of moderately liberal economic policies (including, recently, tax cuts, or the lack of necessity for them). On social issues I think there are a number of Republican policies that are more popular. On “security” issues public opinion always seems to be weird and driven rather primitive and atavistic tribal loyalties (we’re at war!) rather than considered policies. Which is why war mongers so often find it easy to start one. No, I’m not going to hunt through the internet for polls to support my position, I waste enough time here already.

By: abb1

abb1 — Tue, 08 Feb 2005 20:15:24 +0000

Liberal social issues like gay rights, abortion rights, capital punishment – these are all losers for a center-left party, because ordinary people are socially conservative. Normaly, the liberal elite (Barbara Streisand and so on) gets a chance to advance their (indeed noble) causes by piggybacking on blue-collar bread-and-butter issues like the minimum wage or overtime pay or something. A guy in Cincinnati will vote for doubling the minimum wage – while accepting gay mariage or ban on capital punishment as a mildly unpleasant part of the deal. This is how the center-left works, IMHO. When these vote-losing social issues become your only agenda – that means you have no chance.

By: Uncle Kvetch

Uncle Kvetch — Tue, 08 Feb 2005 19:31:20 +0000

That’s it, move them goalposts, Thorley. Heave ho!

By: Thorley Winston

Thorley Winston — Tue, 08 Feb 2005 17:31:18 +0000

MQ wrote:

Pushing minor, unimportant but divisive social issues is of course part of this tactic. Notice Thorley turning immediately to the “gay marriage” issue as an example of where the Repubs are in tune with the country, a trumped up pseudo-issue if there ever was one.

Actually the context in which it was brought up was specifically and solely in response to Mary Kay’s earlier claim that the public supported the Democrat’s position on social and security issues. Had this been the case, then one would have expected the two States (Michigan and Washington) that voted for Senator Kerry in the last election to have rejected their State’s constitutional amendments to codify “civil marriage” as being between a man and a woman.

By: Thorley Winston

Thorley Winston — Tue, 08 Feb 2005 17:28:36 +0000

MQ wrote:

Pushing minor, unimportant but divisive social issues is of course part of this tactic. Notice Thorley turning immediately to the “gay marriage” issue as an example of where the Repubs are in tune with the country, a trumped up pseudo-issue if there ever was one.

Actually the context in which it was brought up was specifically in response to Mary Kay’s earlier claim that the public supported the Democrat’s position on social and security issues. Had this been the case, then one would have expected the two States (Michigan and Washington) that voted for Senator Kerry in the last election to have rejected their State’s constitutional amendments to codify “civil marriage” as being between a man and a woman.

By: Thorley Winston

Thorley Winston — Tue, 08 Feb 2005 17:19:14 +0000

“Which comes closest to your view? Gay couples should be allowed to legally marry. OR, Gay couples should be allowed to form civil unions but not legally marry. OR, There should be no legal recognition of a gay couple’s relationship.” Legal Marriage 21% Civil Unions 32% No Legal Recognition 44% Unsure 3% Source: CBS News/New York Times Poll. Nov. 18-21, 2004

That’s seems like a two-to-one margin in favor of “no legal recognition” versus “civil marriage.” Although the phrase “allowed to” seems rather inaccurate IMO as there is a difference between withholding legal sanction from something versus prohibiting it. It also doesn’t change the fact that when people actually vote on the issue, they tend to overwhelmingly prefer the conservative position.

“Looking back, do you think the United States did the right thing in taking military action against Iraq, or should the U.S. have stayed out?” Did Right Thing 45% Should Have Stayed Out 49% Unsure 6% Source: CBS News/New York Times Poll. Jan. 14-18, 2005.

Putting aside the fact that both Kerry and Edwards voted to resume hostilities with the Iraqi dictatorship, I wouldn’t take this as an endorsement of anyone’s particular policies so much as a reflection of the fact that the polls are going to reflect the public’s perception of the news from Iraq at a given moment rather than a particular policy preference, particularly over the long term. The phrase “looking back” asks the respondent to look at the policy in the context of the information they have at the moment. If the news being reported that week is bad, then it must be going poorly. If the news being reported that week is “good”, then things must be going well. No doubt you’d have much different numbers after the recent Iraqi elections than you would in a week in which the news from Iraq was an attack that leads to American or coalition casualties. If the question had been phrased “looking forward” you would ask the respondent to make a prediction as to the outcome of the policy which IMO seems more reflective of their policy preference or at leas what results the policy will lead to.

By: Thorley Winston

Thorley Winston — Tue, 08 Feb 2005 17:05:03 +0000

“Which comes closest to your view? Gay couples should be allowed to legally marry. OR, Gay couples should be allowed to form civil unions but not legally marry. OR, There should be no legal recognition of a gay couple’s relationship.” Legal Marriage 21% Civil Unions 32% No Legal Recognition 44% Unsure 3% Source: CBS News/New York Times Poll. Nov. 18-21, 2004

That’s seems like a two-to-one margin in favor of “no legal recognition” versus “civil marriage.” Although the phrase “allowed to” seems rather biased IMO as there is a difference between withholding legal sanction from something versus prohibiting it. It also doesn’t change the fact that when people actually vote on the issue, they tend to overwhelmingly prefer the conservative position.

Legal Marriage 21% Civil Unions 32% No Legal Recognition 44% Unsure 3% Source: CBS News/New York Times Poll. Nov. 18-21, 2004. “Looking back, do you think the United States did the right thing in taking military action against Iraq, or should the U.S. have stayed out?” Did Right Thing 45% Should Have Stayed Out 49% Unsure 6% Source: CBS News/New York Times Poll. Jan. 14-18, 2005.

I wouldn’t take this as an endorsement of anyone’s particular policies so much as a reflection of the fact that the polls are going to reflect the public’s perception of the news from Iraq at a given moment rather than a particular policy preference. If the news being reported that week is “good” things must be going well. If the news being reported that week is bad (compared to what?), then it must be going poorly.

By: MQ

MQ — Tue, 08 Feb 2005 16:28:29 +0000

Steve is a good example of the large crowd of people who are “pathologically dependent” on right wing rhetoric to give them scapegoats to feel superior to. No doubt a beleaguered guy stuck somewhere in the middle of the income distribution, he can feel contemptuous of welfare recipients and soothe his envy of the Hollywood “elite”, who he correctly suspects have a lot more fun in life than he does, by feeling morally superior to them. His politics aren’t about policies or their outcomes at all, but about various forms of envy and resentment. That’s what we’re up against, folks.

By: abb1

abb1 — Tue, 08 Feb 2005 16:03:38 +0000

That could be a fake abb1. I protest: Michael Moore is a good guy, he is exactly what the Democratic party is lacking. And I don’t get what his second group is: ‘pathologically dependent’? ‘legal workers’? Lol. That’s nonsense.

By: mondo dentro

mondo dentro — Tue, 08 Feb 2005 15:21:17 +0000

Oops. So, Steve, you’ve got two versions. Pick yer favorite.

By: mondo dentro

mondo dentro — Tue, 08 Feb 2005 15:18:34 +0000

Stevie the Troll says: I suspect, in fifty years’ time, our era will be seen as a 40 year bubble of narcissism-maybe WWII drove the West insane, and the Democratic Party was the US manifestation of that insanity. I’d love to hear what you mean by “narcissism.” Let me guess: those wacky, hedonistic hippies? All the sex, drugs, and rock’n’roll? Feel free to use a broad brush, just fill in the picture a bit for me. I’m sure it will be instructive. As for WWII driving the west insane—yep, you got that right. And today we can see the festering boil of that insanity burst with the current rightist surge in the US. Today’s GOP: praising the greatest generation, and taking a big dump on everything they really stood for. “Each year, 2 million people who fought in the Second World War and lived through the Great Depression die. This generation has been an exception in American history, because it has defended anti-American policies. They voted for the creation of the welfare state and obligatory military service. They are the base of the Democratic Party. And they are dying.” —Grover Norquist, Stevie’s hero

By: mondo dentro

mondo dentro — Tue, 08 Feb 2005 15:13:15 +0000

Stevie the Troll says: I suspect, in fifty years’ time, our era will be seen as a 40 year bubble of narcissism-maybe WWII drove the West insane, and the Democratic Party was the US manifestation of that insanity. I’d love to hear what you mean by “narcissism.” Let me guess: those wacky, hedonistic hippies? All the sex, drugs, and rock’n’roll? Feel free to use a broad brush, just fill in the picture a bit for me. As for WWII driving the west insane—yep, you got that right. And the current rightist surge in the US is the culmination of that insanity. Today’s GOP: praising the greatest generation, and taking a big dump on everything they really stood for. “Each year, 2 million people who fought in the Second World War and lived through the Great Depression die. This generation has been an exception in American history, because it has defended anti-American policies. They voted for the creation of the welfare state and obligatory military service. They are the base of the Democratic Party. And they are dying.” —Grover Norquist, Stevie’s hero

By: Uncle Kvetch

Uncle Kvetch — Tue, 08 Feb 2005 14:49:48 +0000

Interesting claim. Please provide examples of the polls that were “phrased neutrally” showing that a majority of those polled opted for the Democrat position on national security and social issues. “Which comes closest to your view? Gay couples should be allowed to legally marry. OR, Gay couples should be allowed to form civil unions but not legally marry. OR, There should be no legal recognition of a gay couple’s relationship.” Legal Marriage 21% Civil Unions 32% No Legal Recognition 44% Unsure 3% Source: CBS News/New York Times Poll. Nov. 18-21, 2004. “Looking back, do you think the United States did the right thing in taking military action against Iraq, or should the U.S. have stayed out?” Did Right Thing 45% Should Have Stayed Out 49% Unsure 6% Source: CBS News/New York Times Poll. Jan. 14-18, 2005.

By: Steve

Steve — Tue, 08 Feb 2005 14:42:52 +0000

“Ya know, Steve’s comment summed up an important aspect of the right – they look upon the post-WWII golden era as something evil.” Really? I thought we were all stuck in the ‘50’s. You really should try to be more consistent in your insults. Steve