It was only a year ago that voters seemed to be finally waking up from a long, numb slumber. And yet, in many respects, Dems are already on their heels. This as opposed to Republicans, who were able to hold on to governing majorities in the House and Senate since the ‘94 elections.
Why the difference? There have been arguments that the Dems aren’t moving toward "Change" fast or hard enough, and that if Obama and company were only emboldened and courageous enough to enact sweeping changes to our economy, healthcare and social structures the nation would rally around them and we’d ensure strong, progressive-Democratic governing majorities for a generation. While this is a nice idea and one I also aspire to, I think it’s largely bubkes and rooted more in wishful GroupThink than any actual semblance of voter reality – especially among middle and working class independents who vote not their ideas but their realities.
The truth is that, outside of straight party-line voters, independents and moderates, the people who drive election outcomes in tight races, are people who vote their immediate and near-term economic self-interests. The perennial pollster questions "How do you feel about the economy both now and a year from now" and "Are you better off than you were four years ago / How do you feel about the next four years?" are critical to gauging a voter’s discontent. This we know. But if the Republicans are so bad at governing, are constantly exposed as perpetrators of easy, sleazy and rampant corruption, AND consistently push economic policies that kneel at the alter of mega-corporations and business elites at the expense of everyone else, why are they able to retain governing majorities far longer than Democrats? Well, simply put, Democrats govern.
As noted above, the working assumption has been that immediate and near term economic factors drive most elections. It’s certainly true that House and Senate Republicans enjoyed unprecedented economic growth in both the 1990s and early 2000s. This was not due to their policies per say but of timing. The "great railroads" of the technology revolution really picked up steam in the mid and late ’90’s. Bill Clinton enacted mostly moderate, business-friendly policies that were followed by the Great George Bush Giveaway. Which brings us to now, which is just in time for their failed policies to bear their inevitable bitter fruits (see also: September 2008). It is also just as we elect the most Progressive-Moderate President in multiple generations, and task him with the unfortunate job of restoring a gutted, confusing tax system rigged to benefit the wealthy few, repair numerous national institutions, and deal with two mishandled wars. All the while having to do so with a population that’s been reared on a strong distrust of government – and rightly so given its behavior – since the 1970’s.
So long as this is the case Democrats will have a shorter shelf-life. From the taxpayer perspective it’s simple. On the one hand they feel that Dems stick it to them in the short term with new taxes, programs and projects and thus vote GOP. On the other hand they’ve seen time and again that the GOP will screw them in the long run and thus vote Dem.
The challenge is that because of the nature of the two opposing governing styles, the GOP is able to fester in office for much longer than Dems simply because they keep their heads down on so many bread and butter issues when they are in charge. Ideals aside – most people I know, myself included, want to be left alone. And so long as they are, (again, ideals aside,) they will let those in charge remain in charge. Sure, Republicans hand out welfare checks to elites and corporate interests, but those ramifications don’t immediately affect people’s daily lives as directly as say, healthcare reform, addressing environmental damage or protection, or massive spending on a stimulus package.
It’s no wonder that the GOP can make and keep political gains and governing majorities for much longer than Democrats. They get in, hand out a lot of cash to benefactors – including tax payers with tax cuts (even if 99% of those only go to a wealthy few, being seen as tax cutters is the ultimate takeaway), while they and their cronies get rich and maintain the status quo as long as they can (i.e. until it blows up in their faces like last September).
What can be done? That’s for a much longer post. Suffice it to say here that this is a battle that will be won not on policy alone but by the values that drive them. Unless we start promoting progressive values as an end (quality of life) that guide our means (policy), independent and moderate taxpaying voters will see little more than a bunch of Democrats meddling in their lives, spending their money to build a bigger bureaucracy for someone else’s benefit and continue to vote against it.
Marco Ceglie is a Progressive Messaging Consultant and co-founder of Billionaires For Wealthcare (http://billionairesforwealthcare.com)





9 Comments
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About The Seminal
Advanced search
VA and NJ prove that voting isn’t the answer. The people spoke and put thier choice in office. The proof will be in the pudding four years from now, when they again find themselves no better off. Then again they will vote and probably change parties again. Only to find out that won’t make things better.
We are still stuck on the therory that we can solve our problems by voting and changing people and parties.
It hasn’t worked Yet, and undoubtably won’t work now or in the future.
It not the problem of the vote, but the choices people have to vote for.
Picking the best of two snakes, means you still end up holding a snake.
I think a lot of this is spot on, and yet I see so much pushback from the mainstream of the Democratic party when folks start really working with emotions as opposed to policy.
I think it’s especially evident with Grayson, where I’ve seen lots of mainstream grumbling over his “outrageous” statements. They say that’s not what Democrats do, and it’s not how to govern. Respectfully, that’s crap.
Grayson taps into emotion to make a point. It’s not always pretty or politically correct, but it often hits deeper. And that’s why he’ll win re-election. It’s a lesson more should learn. Policy isn’t everything.
esp when only snakes run.
I wasn’t really paying attention to NJ until dirty Christie won. When I saw that Corzine had Goldman Sachs in his blood, then I understood exactly why he lost to dirty Christie.
Dems have a majority now and there is no excuse not to take a huge step back to the people’s business vs. Wall Street.
Yes, Grayson is at his best when he hits a policy bullseye with telling DCers why it matters so much.
Populism is the new black and DC is hopelessly out of fashion.
Yes. NJ voters traded one doofus for another. It’s frustration and anger. The system is rigged so that the voters can vote with F and A, and always get the same result: a politician who will screw all but the wealthy and powerful.
Voting isn’t the answer EXCEPT when it comes to voting for an R to get rid of a bad D. NJ was just treading water. Christie will be no better and no worse than Corzine.
Interesting article.
“The challenge is that because of the nature of the two opposing governing styles, the GOP is able to fester in office for much longer than Dems simply because they keep their heads down on so many bread and butter issues when they are in charge.”
“Keep their head down on bread and butter issues” this is horseshit. “Bread and butter” a war in Iraq based on a “pack of lies”, torture, outing of Plame, tax cuts for the wealthy, illegal wiretapping, doubled the national debt “bread and butter issues” Nah they just left the American public barely able to afford bread and butter
The Republicans are better at spinning and committing crimes and not taking responsibility “Plame” and simple.
Last night on Hardball Eric Cantor was on repeating that this was Obama’s economy Obama’s war all with a shit eating grin. That arrogant asshole is a prime example of how this group of Republicans operate. Their parents never taught them how to take responsibility for their own mistakes. Cantor reminds me of a frat boy who impregnates a young woman and then says “look what she did to herself”
Cantor and his kind (make a mess but take absolutely no responsibility) are just better liars and thieves than many of the Dems.
People seem quick to judge this administration. There are plenty of things that I am not happy with but Christ all Mighty they have only been in there 9 months. Give them half a chance
I like what Rev Sharpton said on “This Week” this past Sunday. “People are realizing that Obama does not walk on water, but he is one of the best swimmers we have right now”
I keep praying and trying to do my part. As Obama told us “make him (congress) do it”
People need to stop shaking those fingers and turn that finger around on themselves. I think Obama needs to implore the public to get more involved that this is a tough road but that we can take this country in a new direction by everyone chipping in…You know that “ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country” way of thinking. think he needs to tap back into that concept while acknowledging times are tough
“While this is a nice idea and one I also aspire to, I think it’s largely bubkes and rooted more in wishful GroupThink than any actual semblance of voter reality – especially among middle and working class independents who vote not their ideas but their realities.” ; as a ‘middle class’ registered independent voter, I say this is bullshit.
The average voter -and we should not forget the percentage of those eligible to vote who actually vote, less than 2/3rds- doesn’t know anything but what the CMM pushes. NOT his or her ‘realities’. The fact is that Obama got 30.10 per cent of those that voted, meaning 69,688,740 of the 231,229,580 that were eligible to vote.
“It is also just as we elect the most Progressive-Moderate President in multiple generations,” ; take out the ‘progressive’ and you might have a point.
“AND consistently push economic policies that kneel at the alter of mega-corporations and business elites at the expense of everyone else, why are they able to retain governing majorities far longer than Democrats? Well, simply put, Democrats govern.” ; again, this is crap. All one has to do is take the blinders off ones eyes to see that the Dems have copied the Repub plans. AND the Obama Admin has been “consistently push(ing) economic policies that kneel at the alter of mega-corporations and business elites at the expense of everyone else,”.
The WHOLE two party system and the elections themselves are corrupt and no amount of caterwauling with change that ‘reality’. AND very often they will vote against incumbents when their personal situations (I guess that is what the writer means by ‘realities’) are junk. Anti-incumbent sentiment is consistently underrated.
Both parties are corrupt. We need campaign financing reform bigtime, but it’ll never happen in my lifetime. We’re stuck mainly with the super rich, like Blumberg in NYC or Schwartzenegger in CA, who can buy themselves a seat at the table, or we’re stuck with those bought off by our corporate overlords, who really rule the roost.
We’re also stuck right now with most Republicans believing that they should never compromise under any circumstances, and that attempting to work together with Democrats to find solutions is for pussies. BHO keeps pushing for bipartisan solutions, and I say he needs to stop that and get on with business. These folks aren’t ever going to play fair, and they’ll lie every chance they get. It wasn’t always this way, but this is what it has devolved to now: here we are in the biggest financial crisis in many a long year, and all these jerks can do is throw tantrums, lie and be obstuctive.
Most citizens are out of the loop. Everyone’s busy, tired, pushed in too many directions, and even my more politically astute friends just don’t have the time and energy (or motivation) to keep up with the b.s. Most people are motivated to vote in the General election and then go home and hope for the best.
These off-year elections are low voter turn out, where the locals vote based on what’s happening right now at home.
I don’t see VA or NJ as some ringing endorsement for the Republicans, or a big spanking for Obama. I don’t think either state had very good Democratic candidates (which may point to issues that the Democratic party can address… maybe & maybe not), but it appears that neither Democrat was particularly good. We had a similar situation in CA a number of years ago with Governor Gray Davis, who was kicked out of office by Republicans hoping to pick up the spoils. Schwartzenegger’s money and star power foiled some real jerks from getting into office, but Davis was booted out bc of his ineffectiveness and inability to communicate well with voters.
What CA has gotten from Ahhhnold is: not much. He came in with his guns blazing saying how he would reform this, that and the other thing, and how all of his business acumen gave him the expertise to “fix” Caleeefornia. Well guess what: he pretty much failed. The failures of governing CA and it’s stupid legislative system is fodder for another time.
Suffice it to say, most voters go for the “shiney object.” In CA, that happened to be Ahhhnold. In VA & NJ, it happened to be the opposition candidate. Same old, different day.
What happened with the Governor of CA had little to nothing to do with the state of either the Democratic or Republican party. It was state politics, as it was yesterday in VA & NJ.
But yes, the Republicans are very good at being slimey and taking no responsisibility for almost anything. Democrats, while not much better, tend to be somewhat more responsible and tend to try to govern better (some of them) and have more concern for citizens. Why some citizens are not bothered by the weasel ways of Republicans has always mystified me.
That sentiment runs against the conventional wisdom that with low turn out races it is the base which counts. In this case I’ll go with the conventional wisdom because I think it’s correct.