Rotten liberal press. Joplin Globe endorses Obama..first Dem since 1908

Yep, I agree. Personally, whoever is elected, I think a shitstorm is coming, and with Democratic hegemony, a great opportunity for the GOP to say "SEE! We told you so!"

 

yeah, and it can go the other way if the Democrats clean up everything. It will hurt the GOP

 

Jazzy:

For a number of reasons I believe this is the presidential election that is putting cracks in the Republican party. (at least for the time being).

I think it stems from several things:

8 years of the Bush administration.
8 years of a form of Politics/Governance that emphasizes politics over governance and emphasizes splitting and blaming Americans rather than trying to unite Americans
8 years of emphasizing mostly a variety, but not all extreme right wing perspectives

IMV, the ironic thing is that McCain is taking the brunt of this dissension. For many years he reflected a brand of Republican that was not to the far right. I'd guess that it is his campaign and choice of running mate that has precipitated the break within the party.

Clearly there is some kind of break. The polls show it. This variety of Republicans/ administration personnel, former elected officials, and commentators are all examples.

On the one hand the public commentators are arguing against excesses expressed and emphasized during the Bush administration. The McCain campaign seems to accept those excesses.

On the other hand, as both you and Pingpong have expressed there is disagreement from the libertarian perpsective. Both of those breaks are occurring.

IMV, McCain and Obama are far less different on defense than say McCain and Paul or McCain and Kucinich. In fact Obama and McCain are far closer to one another than either is to Paul and Kucinich.

On economics, again I see McCain and Obama closer than either is to Paul, for example. I think both you and Pingpong acknowledge that.

On style, or method of governance there is a big gap IMV between McCain and Obama. That is where the commentators seem to be emphasizing.

IMV its ironic that McCain is the recipient of this break in the Republican Party. For years he appealed to those in the middle. Now his campaign has pushed them to Obama.

I have an interest in the strong Libertarian perspective. On the other hand I fear its willingness to make hugely dramatic cuts with what I feel does not yet represent clear visions or thoughtfulness of what should be cut/sacrificed against other choices.

Personally I tend to like the Blue Dog Dem approach. To me its the closest thing to the old style Republican perspective of limited government with a close watch on responsible govt.

 

Yep, agreed again. I was actually thinking this last night - watching Rachel Maddow, her obvious consternation that Obama wouldn't come right out and condemn the ideology of conservatism. It struck me that if, in fact, the house is soundly cleaned up under Democratic hegemony, we're truly in for a secular shift in the decades ahead.

I'm not hopeful, to be honest.

 

EarlPearl, you may be right about the breaks cause with those political celebs. But I don't believe that reflects the everyday republican. The Palin choice helped to unite them. That is apparent with any republican I've spoken to. And I still believe a conservative agenda has wide appeal with the republican base despite what pundits may say. Just my 2 cents though. Tough to prove other than when it is tried in the past it worked.

 

I think what you're seeing is a republican party that has lost its sense of who it is. The republican party that you see today is an amalgamation of different groups formed through political alliances for mutual gain. The same has happened with the democrats, but the alliances on the left, I dont think, have had the same impact since the same level of dissonance of purpose between the groups doesn't exist. And besides, the democratic party is more of a big tent party of individuals than it is a coherent whole.

If the republican party doesn't regroup, figure out what its core values and priorities are, and which subset of the current values it should shed or embrace, we will see an ever-growing number of libertarian-like candidates rise up to fill the void. If the republican party were still the party of Goldwater, would that many people feel the need for a libertarian alternative?

 

@Logic:

I suspect both big parties are big tents to a certain degree. With a Republican in the Presidency and what was very effective Congressional leadership mandating unity for at least the first six years, none of us saw the cracks in the Repub party. Its not cracks out of what is called the base...but its cracks from what is not the base.

Being out of Mainstream power, we don't see the cracks from the dems. If Obama wins I'm sure we will see it. There are big differences between what are called the blue dogs and the liberals. Secondly Dems have not been anywhere's as good as Repubs in maintaining voting unity, at least not for 30-40-maybe 50 years. I doubt if this dem congressional leadership has the strength to maintain the kind of voting unity that the Repubs have had for the period from 2001 to 2007.

@Jazzy:

I think the cracks in the Repubs, as best evidenced by the "pundits" and celebs, are best found in older repubs. In a sense they've been pretty beaten down over the last 8 years. I just think its some percentage, not huge, not easily vocal. I'm sure its more than "5 or 10 or 15" vocal writers/celebs/ex office holders. How many, I don't know.