[Peace-discuss] Irrelevance of "L/R paradigm"

[C. G. Estabrook]

"...what voters care about are not cable-news labels, but*results. *Democrats 
didn't lose because voters think they're too "liberal."  If that were true, how 
would one explain massive Democratic wins in 2006 and 2008, including by 
liberals in conservative districts (such as Alan Grayson); were American voters 
liberal in 2006 and 2008 only to manically switch to being conservative this 
year?  Was Wisconsin super-liberal for the last 18 years when it thrice elected 
Russ Feingold to the Senate, and then suddenly turned hostile to liberals this 
year?  Such an explanation is absurd.

"The answer is that voters make choices based on their assessment of the 
*outcomes from the political class*.  They revolted against the Republican Party 
in the prior two elections because they hated the Iraq War and GOP corruption 
(not because they thought the GOP was "too conservative"), and they revolted 
against Democrats this year because*they have no jobs, are having their homes 
foreclosed by the millions, are suffering severe economic anxiety, and see no 
plan or promise for that to change (not because they think Democrats are "too 
liberal")*." [G. Greenwald]

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20101107/150bc510/attachment.html>