Quote:
|
Originally Posted by spence
I think there's a huge difference.
Much of the disdain I see for the Left is part of a purposeful effort to demonize "liberalisim" in general. If you're following the GOP handbook you attach liberal to Democrat to smear your opponent.
It's silly because the majority of people actually hold some views that are quite liberal, but it's also been executed with success because the Dems haven't been smart enough to counter.
Must of the disdain for Bush is focused on specific policy decisions, rather than on "conservatisim"...Why? Because people naturally segment moderates from social conservatives. They haven't been lumped together like the moderate and progressive Dems have.
To make matters worse, lines have been drawn segmenting Bush followers from everyone else. A conservative thinks Bush's tax cuts are going too far! Agast, they must be a closet liberal! Burn them!!!
My beef against Bush has to do with individual policy decisions and his style of leadership, not a broad based attack against "conservatisim".
But then again, we both know Bush ain't no conservative!
-spence
|
Spence you made an interesting statement regarding the Democrats inability to shake the liberal moniker. I think they lack stratigical planning and foresight. I hang around with a few dyed in the wool liberal democrats. They are frustrated with the lack of leadership within the party.
Where do you stand on Dean and his grass-roots approach? His attempts at changing the party landscape started off with a bang, but have since stuttered. I'd be interested in your take.