The Political Pendulum

[The Sicatoka]

Posit:

The American political pendulum swings too far the other way after a change.

Evidence:

Donald J. Trump is the standard American political response to Barack H. Obama.

Barack H. Obama was the political pendulum over-swing after George W. Bush.


Discuss amongst yourselves. </ Cawffee Tawk voice >

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Political Pendulum

I disagree with your premise. Obama is conservative is his approach and has accomplished nothing that can be construed as over-swing. As I've argued a thousand times already. Obama is more conservative then Bush is on numerous issues.

There is nothing conservative about what was done in Iraq. There is nothing conservative about blowing the countries bank on tax cuts to the rich. There is nothing conservative about passing a new entitlement without passing the requisite taxes to fund it. All of this was done under Bush. Obama did NOTHING close to these three and he's the liberal.

Most of the things Republicans consider over-swing happened in the Supreme Court which in my opinion and many others leans conservative.

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: The Political Pendulum

I said nothing about actual policies or action.

I'm basing it on public perceptions. Bush was perceived to be moderate right. Enter a politically left Obama. Enter a far right Trump.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Political Pendulum

While there are swings, I think they operate on a much longer timeframe. For instance, we are still in the Reagan swing that was a reaction to the FDR swing. From crest to crest we're talking around 50 years -- roughly, two generations. If true the next liberal swing should be well underway around 2030, which means I'll be living the rest of my life in the sort of America I like -- payment for having had to suffer through the last several decades of conservative craptasm. Unless, of course, the energy in the system is decreasing, leading to shorter, smaller swings

There may be several independent pendula. So, swings between isolation and intervention, between plutocracy and egalitarianism, etc., all on different cycles.

There seem to be two trends that are simply background conditions that don't swing back and forth: towards social liberalism and towards an upwards concentration of political power. But both may be the result of trends in population and mobility which happen to have increased over the nation's history. A reversal in population or mobility could lead us back to localized power and parochialism.

Edit: from your follow-up I see you are talking about perceptions. On that I don't agree with the model -- perception is so highly subjective and personalized that I'm not sure one can say anything about it as trending, except for things like the boiling frog metaphor where a gradual but steady move in one direction provokes far less alarm and negative perception than a sudden jolt (for example, the gradual adoption of fringe right wing theories and proposals has now led us to where 60% of Trump supporters support what is prima facie an unconstitutional and spectacularly evil policy of religious discrimination, or the gradual movement on LGBT rights that had continually moved the goalposts on germane political issues).

 

[Rover]

Re: The Political Pendulum

Taking a longer view (I would have been a history major if there was any money in it) I don't see as many swings as some of you others do.

The longest lasting sea change in US political thought was FDR's Presidency. It gave us entitlements/social safety nets/govt regulation/govt as tool for job growth plus the modern day national defense structure as a result of WWII and its aftermath. We're still living within those confines. What conservatives/Republicans have tried to do is tilt those confines in a more rightward direction on the margins, but nobody is openly advocating for getting rid of Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. True conservatism would demand these programs cease to exist. Likewise foreign security pacts like NATO wouldn't exist, you'd have more of a "coalition of the willing" to borrow a Rumsfeld phrase. You also in true conservatism wouldn't have a progressive income tax.

Who holds the reigns of the FDR inspired govt changes from time to time, but again nobody elected Reagan or Bush to dismantle any of that. Which is why they didn't even though in Bush's case he had total control of the govt. Changes in govt are about management or just a change of pace once in awhile. Carter was a reaction to the unprecedented corruption of Nixon, Reagan to the incompetence of Carter, Clinton to the staleness of Reagan-Bush I, I can't explain where GWB came from, but obviously Obama is a reaction to the worst Presidency in living memory. Having said that, given his about even approval ratings I'm curious to see if a backlash elects a Cruz or Trump, as there is no moderate alternative running for the Republican nomination. Regardless, big govt, rightly or wrongly, marches on.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The Political Pendulum

The American political pendulum swings too far the other way after a change.

Evidence:

One might just as well say, "the party that wins an election over-states and mis-interprets that electoral victory as some kind of mandate when it really isn't, and thereby plants the seeds for their own downfall. They are willfully blind to the difference between disgust at the other and approval for self."

The Republican House and Senate got lazy, selfish and complacent in the 2000s. They squandered the edge that got them elected to that majority in the first place.

Compound that with Bush fatigue from 2006 - 2008. The Democrats win a big House majority and a filibuster-proof Senate. The Democrats then squander that majority on a vanity project that was opposed by a majority of the American people, who then swung control of the House (and later, the Senate) the other way, dramatically and quickly.


Seriously, if gun control really were as important to the Democrats as their posturing would have you believe, why did they do nothing about it in 2008 - 2010 when nothing the Republicans could have tried would have stopped them?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Political Pendulum

Seriously, if gun control really were as important to the Democrats as their posturing would have you believe, why did they do nothing about it in 2008 - 2010 when nothing the Republicans could have tried would have stopped them?

Two reasons.

1. They blew all their capital on getting what little stimulus they got to save the failing economy and then blew the entire wad on Obamacare.
2. Without a filibuster proof majority in the Senate you can't do much. Regardless of who you are.

The amount of power you really think one part has over another is interesting. The last cooperating that went on was the Democrats with GW. Once the Dems saw what happened when they needed some cooperation for Obama's Presidency all cooperation ceased after that.

 

[St. Clown]

Re: The Political Pendulum

They didn't blow their political wad with Obamacare, that bill had been dropped early in 2010 to avoid any wad blowing and then passed by both chambers during the lame duck session following the 2010 elections after the Democrats had already lost their seats to their Republican challengers.

 

[rufus]

Re: The Political Pendulum

Seriously, if gun control really were as important to the Democrats as their posturing would have you believe, why did they do nothing about it in 2008 - 2010 when nothing the Republicans could have tried would have stopped them?

Conversely, if healthcare were as important to the Republicans as they claim it is now in light of the ACA, then why did they do nothing about it when they held majorities in Congress and the Oval office?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Political Pendulum

They didn't blow their political wad with Obamacare, that bill had been dropped early in 2010 to avoid any wad blowing and then passed by both chambers during the lame duck session following the 2010 elections after the Democrats had already lost their seats to their Republican challengers.

Are you disputing they lost the seats because of it? That's blowing their wad.

Conversely, if healthcare were as important to the Republicans as they claim it is now in light of the ACA, then why did they do nothing about it when they held majorities in Congress and the Oval office?

And what is their plan? Besides dying young if you're poor or middle class.

 

[St. Clown]

Re: The Political Pendulum

Are you disputing they lost the seats because of it? That's blowing their wad.

It wasn't something they ever voted upon in either house. The idea had been bantered around since it was part of Obama's presidential platform, but no vote was ever made for it because they knew it was a loser politically. Then after they already lost their marginal members to the Republicans, Pelosi and Reid had a ****-It-All moment and scheduled the lame duck vote.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Political Pendulum

It wasn't something they ever voted upon in either house. The idea had been bantered around since it was part of Obama's presidential platform, but no vote was ever made for it because they knew it was a loser politically. Then after they already lost their marginal members to the Republicans, Pelosi and Reid had a ****-It-All moment and scheduled the lame duck vote.

Whether they voted on it or not it was discussed heavily for months in the media and with Constituents. And yes, it was a loser politically. It SUCKED all the oxygen out of the room towards the end of Obama's first term and lost him a ton of political capital.

Thus my "blew their wad" comment. During that lame duck they could have gotten a ton of other stuff done that was LESS controversial. Instead it took the entire lame duck away and blew all their chances to accomplish something on this one pile of crap.

I do follow these things you know. It's not like I'm around here just making stuff up. It's also conventional wisdom in media circles that they blew the political capital of the first term on Obamacare. And we see the result every single day. Every day the GOP makes political hay with it's followers on this issue. With numerous votes against it. Supreme Court runs. Now you even have Ryan saying they need an alternative. The clowns have been telling us they have one since 5 minutes after it passed. I've yet to see one but it doesn't change the political hay they make off the issue every single day.

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: The Political Pendulum

There are a lot of Senate Democrats from western pro-gun states. That issue and that issue alone can cost those folks a Senate seat.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Political Pendulum

The clowns have been telling us they have one since 5 minutes after it passed. I've yet to see one but it doesn't change the political hay they make off the issue every single day.

If you're going to blow your political capital on anything, Obamacare is a good thing to do it on. With the exception of re-adopting an Eisenhower Era progressive tax structure, nothing could have benefited more Americans in a more significant way.

The Republicans' 8-year long crying jag about Obama is certainly preventing America from addressing serious problems, but health care was a once-in-a-century atomic bomb that we are now on the road to defusing. America seems to only be able to handle one important thing every 40 years: independence, plutocracy round I, slavery, plutocracy round II, global fascism, civil rights, health care. The next one up looks to be plutocracy, round III because that cancer can never be cured, but only forced into remission.

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: The Political Pendulum

The article is subtle as a sledgehammer to the forehead, but here's what I'm trying to draw out.

Trump’s vague “make America great again” was the natural bookend to Barack Obama’s even more vacuous “hope and change.”

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428256/donald-trump-muslims-political-correctness

 

[St. Clown]

Re: The Political Pendulum

I do follow these things you know. It's not like I'm around here just making stuff up. It's also conventional wisdom in media circles that they blew the political capital of the first term on Obamacare. And we see the result every single day. Every day the GOP makes political hay with it's followers on this issue. With numerous votes against it. Supreme Court runs. Now you even have Ryan saying they need an alternative. The clowns have been telling us they have one since 5 minutes after it passed. I've yet to see one but it doesn't change the political hay they make off the issue every single day.

You follow these things, the people reading these political threads follow these things, and I follow these things. The average voter does not follow these things. It's proven time and time again. The average voter does not watch or read the news, and the average voter is not taking part in political discussions. The average voter saw political attack ads during primetime TV and then went on to vote to either mimic their parents or to rebel against their parents, or they take guidance on their vote from their church or other social group's instruction.

An actual vote on a controversial subject is something people would take note of and use in a vote. A discussion about a controversial vote that has not yet happen does not register with John Q. Public.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Political Pendulum

You follow these things, the people reading these political threads follow these things, and I follow these things. The average voter does not follow these things. It's proven time and time again. The average voter does not watch or read the news, and the average voter is not taking part in political discussions. The average voter saw political attack ads during primetime TV and then went on to vote to either mimic their parents or to rebel against their parents, or they take guidance on their vote from their church or other social group's instruction.

An actual vote on a controversial subject is something people would take note of and use in a vote. A discussion about a controversial vote that has not yet happen does not register with John Q. Public.

Uh, huh. That's why people in Kentucky just voted to eliminate the only Health Care they have. I'm well aware of how people vote and it's 99% based on fear mongering. And the fear mongering going on about this Health Care law before it was passed was off the charts and everywhere. And that fear mongering is still gathering plenty of traction.

Why do you think Trump is leading the polls? It sure as hell isn't his well thought out policy proposals.

Make people afraid of something and you can get all the traction you need.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: The Political Pendulum

I'm surprised on a political pendulum thread there haven't already been discussion about a perceived general shift way to the right. As in, many dems believe that Reagan would be a near democrat based on his agenda and Ford an outright leftie. Bachmann, Huckabee, Perry...none of these guys would be permitted in politics in 1970. And Goldwater was laughed out of the 1990s as being to liberal.

On surface, that pendulum has been swinging in one direction for a generation.

If you're going to blow your political capital on anything, Obamacare is a good thing to do it on.

The other would have been getting away from an oil based economy to alternatives, solar, etc. Could have been a new deal type of initiative in 2009.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Political Pendulum

The other would have been getting away from an oil based economy to alternatives, solar, etc. Could have been a new deal type of initiative in 2009.

A change is gonna come, but it's not gong to come from the US. As we fill our kids' heads full of 3rd century idiocy, the rest of the world will slowly but inexorably clean our clocks and leave us in the technological dust. America has been turning inwards, like Ming China, even since the 1970s. The transformative changes of the future will come from other places, as we happily slurp our big gulps in Spengler's Junk Yard of Stillborn Civilizations.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Political Pendulum

A change is gonna come, but it's not gong to come from the US. As we fill our kids' heads full of 3rd century idiocy, the rest of the world will slowly but inexorably clean our clocks and leave us in the technological dust. America has been turning inwards, like Ming China, even since the 1970s. The transformative changes of the future will come from other places, as we happily slurp our big gulps in Spengler's Junk Yard of Stillborn Civilizations.

Here is where we're at as a country.

WASHINGTON — Sen. Ted Cruz and three other Republican senators voted on Thursday against a non-binding Senate resolution affirming that the United States does not use religious tests for immigrants seeking admission into the country.

The amendment passed 16 to 4, with Sens. David Vitter and Thom Tillis joining Sessions and Cruz in opposing the language.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/johnstanton...ate-resolution-that-rejects-trumps#.wr5W63m0A