"Change we can believe in" could lead to a permanent Democratic majority

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

For the people who elected Obama and the increased Democratic majority, “change we can believe in” isn’t about bailouts for corporations and banks. It isn't about wearing American flag pins on your lapel while the military budget continues to escalate and bankers and corporate CEO’s wine and dine. “Change we can believe in” isn’t about a spruced up version of trickle down theory or the same policies behind a fresh face in the White House.

It is about reversing and repealing the policies that have both led to the immediate financial crisis and looming global depression. It is about ending the post-World War II policies that led to the long-term stagnation and decline of the labor movement. It is about creating a national public health care program more than 50 years after it was established in other major industrial nations, and handling a national debt which has increased 10 times since Ronald Reagan became president in 1981.

A “single payer” national health system – known as “socialized medicine” in the rest of the developed world – should be an essential part of the change that the core constituencies which elected Obama desperately need. Britain serves as an important political lesson for strategists. After the Labor Party established the National Health Service after World War II, supposedly conservative workers and low-income people under religious and other influences who tended to support the Conservatives were much more likely to vote for the Labor Party when health care, social welfare, education and pro-working class policies were enacted by labor-supported governments.

In addition, passing the Employee Free Choice Act to make joining a union easier and to expand the base of union voters who supported Obama by nearly 50 points on Nov. 4 seems only logical. It would also provide a massive boost for working families struggling with stagnant incomes, high health care costs, retirement costs and job insecurity.

The best way to win over the the portion of the working class in the South or the West that supported McCain and the Republicans is to create important new public programs and improve the social safety net. National health care, significantly higher minimum wages, support for trade union organizing, aid to education should all be on the agenda. These programs will improve the quality of our lives lives directly, giving us greater security and establishing the social economic changes that will bring reluctant voters into the Obama coalition. That is how progress works.

The right-wing propaganda machine will scream socialism, and that is also a good thing. Because the more socialism comes to be identified with real policies that raise the standard of living and improve the quality of life for the working class and the whole people, the more socialism will be looked at seriously. A stronger left that follows the tradition of the Communist Party in its unbreakable commitment to a socialist future and to educating people about the value and necessity of socialist policies in the present could follow.

http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/articleview/7722/

[mawilson 2,133]

A stronger left that follows the tradition of the Communist Party in its unbreakable commitment to a socialist future and to educating people about the value and necessity of socialist policies in the present could follow.

And that's a good thing?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Like the permanent conservative rule that Newt's "Contract with America" was supposed to bring about.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

In other words - George W. Bush has done enough damage to the GOP's (and this country's) reputation to put the party in the weeds.

McCain didn't exactly help what with his selection of that Palin woman - especially after her antics at the Republican governors' convention where she tried to upstage the others and virtually had to be dragged off the podium by Rick Perry. McCain and his team should take the main blame for picking her, but the racism. the vulgarity and the ignorance of her campaign in which she divided 'other' Americans from 'real' Americans must surely be one of their most shameful moments. I thought the whole gang of them revealed just how far they were prepared to go to lay hands on power and took Roveism about as far as it could go before the public could stand no more. Until Republicans return to their core values, they won't have any respect from me and probably won't win too many elections.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

This is a non-story.

[Pooky 3,786]

In other words - George W. Bush has done enough damage to the GOP's (and this country's) reputation to put the party in the weeds.

McCain didn't exactly help what with his selection of that Palin woman - especially after her antics at the Republican governors' convention where she tried to upstage the others and virtually had to be dragged off the podium by Rick Perry. McCain and his team should take the main blame for picking her, but the racism. the vulgarity and the ignorance of her campaign in which she divided 'other' Americans from 'real' Americans must surely be one of their most shameful moments. I thought the whole gang of them revealed just how far they were prepared to go to lay hands on power and took Roveism about as far as it could go before the public could stand no more. Until Republicans return to their core values, they won't have any respect from me and probably won't win too many elections.

If, as President-elect Obama maintains, things will get worse under his stewardship in the next 2 years before they start getting better, the GOP may not have to do anything in order to win big in the mid-terms and win back the Presidency in 2012. And that is a frightening thought.

[dalegg 143]

In other words - George W. Bush has done enough damage to the GOP's (and this country's) reputation to put the party in the weeds.

McCain didn't exactly help what with his selection of that Palin woman - especially after her antics at the Republican governors' convention where she tried to upstage the others and virtually had to be dragged off the podium by Rick Perry. McCain and his team should take the main blame for picking her, but the racism. the vulgarity and the ignorance of her campaign in which she divided 'other' Americans from 'real' Americans must surely be one of their most shameful moments. I thought the whole gang of them revealed just how far they were prepared to go to lay hands on power and took Roveism about as far as it could go before the public could stand no more. Until Republicans return to their core values, they won't have any respect from me and probably won't win too many elections.

If, as President-elect Obama maintains, things will get worse under his stewardship in the next 2 years before they start getting better, the GOP may not have to do anything in order to win big in the mid-terms and win back the Presidency in 2012. And that is a frightening thought.

Yes. I'm frankly amazed at how much people think Republicans have to "change", blah, blah, blah. If the Democrats fail Pat Robertson could be the the GOP nominee and promise "change back" and the country will follow. If the Democrats succeed, why would people vote for Republicans under a new brand or an old brand?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

In other words - George W. Bush has done enough damage to the GOP's (and this country's) reputation to put the party in the weeds.

McCain didn't exactly help what with his selection of that Palin woman - especially after her antics at the Republican governors' convention where she tried to upstage the others and virtually had to be dragged off the podium by Rick Perry. McCain and his team should take the main blame for picking her, but the racism. the vulgarity and the ignorance of her campaign in which she divided 'other' Americans from 'real' Americans must surely be one of their most shameful moments. I thought the whole gang of them revealed just how far they were prepared to go to lay hands on power and took Roveism about as far as it could go before the public could stand no more. Until Republicans return to their core values, they won't have any respect from me and probably won't win too many elections.

If, as President-elect Obama maintains, things will get worse under his stewardship in the next 2 years before they start getting better, the GOP may not have to do anything in order to win big in the mid-terms and win back the Presidency in 2012. And that is a frightening thought.

I don't know if that's how it works to be honest - we've lacked credible political opposition in Britain since the tory collapse in 1997, but Labour will in all likelihood continue to win elections for the forseeable future. Pretty much the same thing happened in the UK after the last (Old) Labour government. Few people are happy with Gordon Brown - but go along with it because they perceive the alternative to be worse.

Perhaps people here are less apathetic and more likely to vote on a kneejerk - but I kind of doubt it.

Edited November 24, 2008 by Paul Daniels

[HAL 9000 96]

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Like the permanent conservative rule that Newt's "Contract with America" was supposed to bring about.

Pretty much.

Its just AJ trying to whip up the neo-cons into a new anti-Obama rant again.

[alienlovechild 75]

McCain and his team should take the main blame for picking her, but the racism. the vulgarity and the ignorance of her campaign in which she divided 'other' Americans from 'real' Americans must surely be one of their most shameful moments.

What racism? How exactly did Palin "divide" "real Americans" from everyone else? Far more likely she was looking for votes in existing factions has much as Obama and company peddled the class warfare and racial divisions charges.

[HAL 9000 96]

And it worked for Obama- perhaps because he spoke to something most voters were interested in hearing. Lest we forget the polls and what people were turned off about the McCain/Palin campaign.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Yes. I'm frankly amazed at how much people think Republicans have to "change", blah, blah, blah. If the Democrats fail Pat Robertson could be the the GOP nominee and promise "change back" and the country will follow. If the Democrats succeed, why would people vote for Republicans under a new brand or an old brand?

I think its become clear that the Republicans need to modernise their political platform - its a bandwagon they've been pushing since Reagan took office. In that respect Bush may well have hammered the last nail into the coffin of the Reagan economic model - a model which relied on keeping money flowing through the system by any means possible and which relied on encouraging debt (both personal and national) to keep money circulating. It was always a dangerous and reckless system, benefitting the rich before it benefitted (if it ever did) the ordinary people; people who were were encouraged to spend money on consumer goods before basic necessities and who borrowed increasingly on their houses or on unsecured credit cards. Now those people are suffering badly while those who promoted the system are being bailed out by our money.

What alarms me is that so few politicians have queried the basics of system which is clearly completely phoney and will never spread wealth downwards in the way that has been claimed. Now ordinary people are poorer now than they were since perhaps 1980 - yet we are still being persuaded to prop up this ridiculous topsy-turvy system. What politicians and those they represent should really do is throw out that system altogether.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

McCain and his team should take the main blame for picking her, but the racism. the vulgarity and the ignorance of her campaign in which she divided 'other' Americans from 'real' Americans must surely be one of their most shameful moments.

What racism? How exactly did Palin "divide" "real Americans" from everyone else? Far more likely she was looking for votes in existing factions has much as Obama and company peddled the class warfare and racial divisions charges.

During one of the election rallies she suggested that there was a "real" and a "fake" America.

"The real America" "pro-American":

She later apologised.

Jon Stewart ran a helpful quiz, to help Americans who were unsure - to work out whether they were "real", or in fact fake:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jh...a-Real-American?

[alienlovechild 75]

McCain and his team should take the main blame for picking her, but the racism. the vulgarity and the ignorance of her campaign in which she divided 'other' Americans from 'real' Americans must surely be one of their most shameful moments.

What racism? How exactly did Palin "divide" "real Americans" from everyone else? Far more likely she was looking for votes in existing factions has much as Obama and company peddled the class warfare and racial divisions charges.

During one of the election rallies she suggested that there was a "real" and a "fake" America.

"The real America" "pro-American":

She later apologised.

Jon Stewart ran a helpful quiz, to help Americans who were unsure - to work out whether they were "real", or in fact fake:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jh...a-Real-American?

Missed the racist angle (can't see the Dailyshow at work) and the article had a couple of sentences on Palin despite the misleading headline, it was mostly about a couple of low-profile Congressional races. There's no indication the election hinged on the "real" vs. "fake" America.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

McCain and his team should take the main blame for picking her, but the racism. the vulgarity and the ignorance of her campaign in which she divided 'other' Americans from 'real' Americans must surely be one of their most shameful moments.

What racism? How exactly did Palin "divide" "real Americans" from everyone else? Far more likely she was looking for votes in existing factions has much as Obama and company peddled the class warfare and racial divisions charges.

During one of the election rallies she suggested that there was a "real" and a "fake" America.

"The real America" "pro-American":

She later apologised.

Jon Stewart ran a helpful quiz, to help Americans who were unsure - to work out whether they were "real", or in fact fake:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jh...a-Real-American?

Missed the racist angle (can't see the Dailyshow at work) and the article had a couple of sentences on Palin despite the misleading headline, it was mostly about a couple of low-profile Congressional races. There's no indication the election hinged on the "real" vs. "fake" America.

I didn't say the election hinged on it. I said that she patronised the electorate by trying to crudely divide them into "real" and "fake" americans.