Thomas B. Edsall
RSS

The New Party

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

August 27, 2008 11:37 PM



The nomination of Barack Obama will test whether the new Democratic coalition has grown strong enough to fend off Republican assaults to produce the first presidential victory for a non-Southern candidate in 44 years - and the first victory for a black in the history of the nation.

The Obama campaign has accelerated a transformation already underway in the Democratic electorate. 2008 appears likely to mark the death knell for what remained of the New Deal coalition - the coalition that was crucial to the early elections of such politicians as Joe Biden and Ted Kennedy.

In its place is a Democratic alliance that initially emerged during George McGovern's 1972 campaign, became competitive in the 1990s under Bill Clinton, and that now appears to be solidifying as the core of the party: a combination of "haves" -- socially liberal, well-educated whites, especially the young, and "have-nots" -- black and Hispanic minority voters.

This new Democratic Party lacks the economic coherence of "the party of the working man and women" that united under Franklin Delano Roosevelt and remained powerful through the 1964 election of Lyndon Johnson. On the one hand, in the new Democratic alliance, minorities generally place top priority on traditional bread and butter issues, while relatively well-off whites are more concerned with 'post-materialist' issues such as abortion, women's rights, sexual autonomy, self- expression, and a shared hostility to evangelical and other traditional religious agendas seen as repressive.

As the new center-left coalition has formed, it has proven repeatedly vulnerable to Republican attacks, capitalizing on backlash against the socially liberal, pro-civil rights, and anti-war views of Democratic activists. Using issues ranging from affirmative action to gay marriage, from black rates of crime to Democratic distaste for the use of force (national defense, gun control, mandatory sentencing, etc.) -- the GOP has pushed socially conservative and conventionally patriotic working-class and Southern whites into the Republican fold.

Democratic presidential victories over the past 48 years have been restricted to white male nominees from below the Mason-Dixon line: Johnson in '64, Jimmy Carter in 1976, and Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996.

University of Maryland political scientist Thomas Schaller, author of the 2006 book Whistling Past Dixie, argued to the Huffington Post that Obama "has a chance to peel away more upscale, well-educated, environmentally friendly whites, including some men," but he risks losing "downscale whites."

Schaller is a leading advocate of a Democratic strategy that effectively abandons much of the South. "Republicans have squeezed every last vote out of their mostly white, largely Southern, highly divisive, screw-the-coasts national strategy," Schaller contends. "The changes to come [benefiting Democrats] will be brought from the three-quarters of America found [in the north] or "west of the Mississippi River."

Story continues below
advertisement

As a wealthy Ivy league graduate/Harvard trained lawyer and an African American, Obama -- and his similarly situated Princeton/Harvard educated wife Michelle - may bridge and/or unite the two wings of the Democratic party - upscale and downscale -- two wings whose material and post-material interests have in the past often diverged.

While Obama is strengthening this new Democratic coalition, there is some evidence that he may renew the party's diminished salience for working and lower-middle class whites.

The Democracy Corps, under the guidance of Stanley Greenberg, earlier this year polled and conducted focus groups in Macomb County, Michigan, home of many autoworkers and laid-off or retired members of the United Automobile Workers (UAW). The county has become the emblematic case study for so-called Reagan Democrats - a white working class population which cast decisive majorities for JFK in 1960 but then overwhelmingly rejected Walter Mondale in favor of Ronald Reagan in 1984.

Now, in 2008, according to Greenberg's survey data, the response of these voters and their children to Obama is lukewarm at best. While racial issues dominated the concerns of such voters two decades ago when they saw the Democratic Party as working to help African Americans at the expense of whites, today, the Democracy Corps study found, the biggest concern is "about Obama on national security, patriotism and keeping America strong....These are strong-defense Democrats who give Obama remarkably low marks on national security and have great trouble dismissing what Reverend [Jeremiah] Wright said about America."

In addition, according to the Democracy Corps, there are concerns among these voters that are "racial but not necessarily racist. These voters want to know that Obama will be a president for the whole country and not mainly represent African Americans - and for many this is a threshold issue.... Only 19 percent think he is similar to Jesse Jackson. However, these voters do not understand how Obama could sit in Reverend Wright's pews for 20 years."

While warning of white working class defections, the Democracy Corps conducted a separate study of young voters showing overwhelming support for Obama and, in what will be very important over the long haul, for the Democratic Party: "Barack Obama's support among young people is stable and convincing (currently 57-29 percent Obama). This stability rests in part on the strong belief among young people that Barack Obama can change things in this country."

The Corps found that "Impressive majorities of young people defy the cynical stereotypes of this generation and predict major changes on the economy, on Iraq, on health care, on energy, even gas prices....Young people do not believe John McCain can bring about change." The following chart -- tracking the favorability ratings among young voters -- suggests that Obama's strength will likely grow.

The Obama campaign is banking on solid backing among such young voters, combined - crucially - with stronger turnout and broader margins among black voters to compensate for losses among working-class whites, especially in such states as Ohio, Michigan and Pennsylvania where the "Reagan Democrat" vote can be significant.

Black turnout this November is almost certain to be significantly higher than in previous elections.

A substantial increase in black turnout, coupled with enthusiastic election day support from the new and growing class of socially liberal 'new class" or 'knowledge work' voters -- whom the Obamas also represent exceptionally well -- may reduce the importance of white high-school-only, low and middle income desertion.

An analysis by Nate Silver at the polling web site 538 found that increasing black turnout will have significant consequences:

"For each 10 percent increase in African-American turnout, Obama gains approximately 13 electoral votes, and 1 percent in his popular vote margin against John McCain. Even a 10 percent increase is enough to take him from a slight underdog against McCain to a slight favorite, while at higher levels of turnout improvement, Obama becomes the strong favorite."

Regardless of the outcome on November 4, the long-range issue for the Democratic Party is whether the new coalition has staying power, or whether the gains made this year evaporate in the future without Obama at the top of the ticket -- inspiring the surge of support he has produced among blacks and those under the age of 35. Conversely, the issue for the Republican Party, regardless of whether it holds or loses the White House, is whether it can make adjustments to accommodate the demographic changes - the growth in the number of Hispanics, unmarried, and well-educated voters - so that such trends do not work only to the advantage of the Democrats.

The nomination of Barack Obama will test whether the new Democratic coalition has grown strong enough to fend off Republican assaults to produce the first presidential victory for a non-Southern candi...
The nomination of Barack Obama will test whether the new Democratic coalition has grown strong enough to fend off Republican assaults to produce the first presidential victory for a non-Southern candi...
 
Comments
296
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next › Last » (4 pages total)

Can someone who has voted Republican since 1984 really be called a Democrat?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:22 PM on 08/28/2008
- egal I'm a Fan of egal permalink
photo

Somehow, the concerns of those who refuse to accept Obama as NOT being foreign and unChristian aren't racist? That's BS. It's very racist, insular, willfully uninformed, and arrogant. How dare they believe it's okay for a white, rich man with no real-world comprehension and huge lobbyist influence to represent his special interests but not a black man who grew up with little.

Maybe it's because they don't trust blacks, maybe it's beause they beleive whites superior enough to not sell out to their own demographics, but no matter how and why they justify this hypocrisy, it IS racism.

The only reason anyone pretends these people aren't bigoted is because they are so sure of their own superiority that any suggestion they're racists basing their opinions on nothing more than prejudice will offend their self-aggrandizing sensibilities and ensure they don't vote for a man they would never vote for anyway because they think of him as black as if it means he can't also be American.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:52 PM on 08/28/2008

I watch the DNC and see diversity on the floor, and then I know when the RNC is held, it's just going to be a sea of white -- and probably old -- faces.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:17 PM on 08/28/2008

Considering Democrats have built the foundation for the welfare state to replace the balck man's role in a family it is no wonder they bring down the black vote at a 90% rate.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:48 PM on 08/28/2008

Mr. Schaller is a professor at the University of Maryland, BALTIMORE COUNTY. When you say "University of Maryland", that makes people think he's from the wider recognized "College Park" UMD school (home of the Terrapins), when in fact he's a professor at UMBC (home of the Retrievers), a completely separate school.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:54 PM on 08/28/2008

Go Terps, my favorite college basketball team of all time.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:54 PM on 08/28/2008

To be fair, the Democrats can win by being "the same old party". It's all a matter of selling the idea to the American public that they are somehow different in a significant way from what came before. Thus far, they haven't presented anything that I find particularly persuasive.

What do they plan on doing to secure our borders, for example? I've heard them toss around ideas, but they haven't shown the People anything to demonstrate that their solutions will resolve our border crisis. Or how are they going to supplant foreign oil as the lifeblood of our economy? All this talk about wind and solar energy is great, but can they give us details about how they plan on harness "alternative" energy sources to get my car running so that it can take me to and from work? And oh yes, how are the Democrats planning on convincing the Pakistanis that they need to let us go into North Waziristan to get at the Al Qaida leadership?

These folks certainly know how to bash George Bush, but it takes more than the ability to bash a politicians to prove to the American People that they deserve to run the United States. Thus far, the Democratic Party has left me unimpressed.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:33 PM on 08/28/2008

The bashing seems to be working for McCain. Unfortunately, the vast majority of Americans think of the election process as a popularity contest. They do not do their research. They only watch the news on TV which is painfully incomplete to say the least. It's as though they're voting for Student Body President. That's what the Straight Jacket Express is all about. Connecting with ignorant voters on their level.

I was raised as a Republican and remember voting that way not really knowing why other than my parents were vocal Republicans. When I began to do my own research I discovered certain truths about both parties that disturbed me.

The MSM is the single most destructive force in this country.* News should not be entertainment. It should be news. Unless people dig deeper they will never know the truth about either candidate.

I'm an Indy Obama supporter at present. That is based on my research of the issues and the candidate's voting history.

*Paraphrasing from Chuck Klosterman's recent article

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:24 PM on 08/28/2008

I do a lot of research and have come to the conclusion that McCain would suck as a leader, Obama would be better as a leader. But my big problem arrives when you actually dig into these guys and their proposals . . . they both suck.

Neither is planning on reducing spending or even keeping it where it is . . . Obama has another $1+ trillion per year slated to be spent and McCain just wants to keep the same BS policies.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:00 PM on 08/28/2008
photo

Well, the Republican party has taken the largest surplus in the history of the U.S. and turned it into the largest debt in the U.S.' history. The Republicans are not troubled about a plan to get into Pakistan because the Bush Administration gave up looking for Bin Laden shortly after he provided them an (bad) excuse to invade Iraq. McCain believes the answer to our energy concerns is not to develop alternative energies but simply to get access to more (protected) areas where we can continue our dependance on oil (this keeps his big oil contributors happy as well as the Saudi's). As for all this talk about wind and solar energy, yeah thosem ideas are CRAZY! By the way, the ability to harness alternative energy has been figured out already, it's the auto industry thats holding things back. If you want a government that can force private industry to do things you better think about real estate in China.

You are right that it takes more then the ability to bash a politician to run a country, you must have learned that from watching Bush and Rove.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:34 PM on 08/28/2008

That surplus however was based on a .COMbubble which came crashing down just like the housing market which was also being inflated during that period.

It is very convenient to try and blame one side or the other but all these people are in the same boat and all have ignored the reality of our financial situation and both sides continue to spend.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:57 PM on 08/28/2008

The above comments by " DueTruthinesss " provide an excellent illustration why so many Americans have a difficult time embracing the Democratic Party. The People want solutions, not more fingerpointing, the Democrats will fail if the entirety of their case for power will be that the other party is bad.

You people need to make your own case to the American People that doesn't rely on pointing out the flaws of your rivals. If your leaders can't do that during this campaign season, then they're wasting our time.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:49 PM on 08/28/2008
photo

"It's all a matter of selling the idea to the American public" ???

But how can that happen when the right wing controls the media?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:14 PM on 08/28/2008

Come on Marlyn, Obama has been getting a ton of great coverage.

The right wing controls talk radio because liberals don't bring in cash in that medium, other than that I don't see an extreme bias either way on network news coverage.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:50 PM on 08/28/2008

...."how are the Democrats planning on convincing the Pakistanis that they need to let us go into North Waziristan to get at the Al Qaida leadership"?

What do you mean us? You go into North freeking Waziristan without me dude.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:23 PM on 08/28/2008

"What do you mean us? You go into North freeking Waziristan without me dude."

Fine, then your candidate should spell that out instead of hiding behind platitudes and relying solely on blaming everything on George Bush to make his case to the People. Does Obama have the balls to do that? He's gonna have to show it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:51 PM on 08/28/2008
- CMLA I'm a Fan of CMLA permalink

Why dont you tell us how McCain is going to get us into Pakistan. Maybe thats what you should worry about instead of bothering us.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:14 PM on 08/28/2008

In the 1960's we youngsters (white,black, yellow, and red) voted for JFK, had our dreams dashed with his assassination, then we marched with the MLK, had our dreams dashed again, finally we supported Robert Kennedy, and we almost entirely deflated with his assassination. We "got back up" to protest the Vietnam War. That resulted in bringing "the troops home". We have been waiting for someone like Barack Obama for more than 40 years. We know that the youngsters of this generation might surprise some, but we have no doubt that they will get out and vote for our renewed hope in this world. Voting is their vehicle, as protesting was ours. I used to say "kids are people too", from toddlers, to teenagers. I have long since realized "kids are people", period. I know we can count on them. I have more faith in the average 18 year old, than most of the "adults" of America. They have their work cut out for them, just as we did, just as our parents, and grandparents before us. What they have that we, for the most part did not, is the blessings of their previous generation. God speed, we are confident to rely on our new generation.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:55 AM on 08/28/2008

Great post. 40 years is a long time to wait. With the help of these amazing young people, we will elect Barack Obama.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:58 AM on 08/28/2008

It just be my day to be in disagreement with the Huffington Post. I think it is a mistake to dwell on past voter demographics, and instead trust the message of hope and change and create new demographics in the process.

If the republicans have done anything well it is to study the map and sway the demographics you are talking about here. What they can't be prepared for is for the democrats to first have confidence in their message and then convey that message to the American public.

That was the single most encouraging thing I saw in the convention coverage last night. It looked like a new party, it sounded like a new party, and now all the democrats have to do is be a new party and there are enough disheartened people in this nation to make that a reality.

The one thing I was disappointed in and the one thing I hope Obama corrects tonight is reaching out and making direct contact with the young people of this nation who have a lot more at stake to lose and are more savvy and open minded when it comes to politics. I have not seen such a ground swell on interest in politics among the young since the 60's and capitalizing on that at this moment in time would mean that all bets are off when it comes to the old demographics.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:46 AM on 08/28/2008

Young people are more savvy about politics? What planet are you on?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:01 AM on 08/28/2008

Young people vote on hype and 95% have no clue what they are talking about until they actually collect a paycheck and see it for themselves.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:17 AM on 08/28/2008

Oh please. This is a costly Hollybama deal tonight. Some of us work, so we can pay the way for the rest of you. Hope and change does not pay the bills-what change? I have been waiting six months for a specific plan. The gushing storytelling does not work. Give a plan-and you can get some of us to vote for you. The young people are living off of their parents. Change that and make them work.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:01 PM on 08/28/2008

You haven't been listening. I am so sick of lazy people who claim they don't know what he stands for. He has been talking about his positions till he's blue in the face. And you can access any of his positions using the web. At what point does it become incumbent upon you to find information yourself? Does he really need to physically come to your living room and explain this stuff to you? Get educated! Stop waiting for it to happen to you--make it happen. Stop being lazy.

But you already know this. You are just a troll pretending to have an open mind, but you don't. You aren't going to vote for him no matter what he says.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:10 PM on 08/28/2008
photo

"It just be my day to be in disagreement with the Huffington Post."

UncleHomer, I wouldn't say you disagree with Huffington Post, but rather that you disagree with the poster, Thomas B. Edsall, and so do I.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:31 PM on 08/28/2008

The mean behavior of the McCain campaign during this Democratic Convention instead helped to unite Democrats. Republicans were expecting drama and conflict; instead, to their chagrin, they got amazement and resounding acclamation for the Democratic nominee! The country has now seen how mean and his team are--the Karl Rove dirty politics operators. That is the kind of politics that brought us to the dire place we are in now and that we MUST get away from. Finally, we should never toy with the idea of an extended Bush Presidency through McCain. McCain will surely take us quickly into World War III. Remember his "bomb, bomb, bomb" quip!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:45 AM on 08/28/2008
- cgr I'm a Fan of cgr permalink

As a lover of language as representative, ideally, of reality in communication, I wonder where/when it was decided that Obama is a "black" man, a "black" candidate, etc.

He is, in fact, bi-racial; half black, half white and raised by white mother and grandparents, which would seem, if any designation has to be given, (it has to, apparently), preponderance would be to the white side.

How, then, does "black" become the label as who he is?

The fact that he is of both white and black heritage makes him, in my opinion, the finest exemplar bridge to tolerance and unity I can imagine running for the highest office in the land that has been so divided along racial lines.

Language representing reality also keeps me bemused that Bill Clinton is so often referred to as "President Clinton". We have only one president at a time, therefore, Bill Clinton is in fact (fact, i.e. reality), "former President Bill Clinton".

Sloppy use of language leads to sloppy thinking and sloppy understanding. We all, the media, especially, would greatly improve communication and understanding by adhering to authenticity and veracity to our speaking, simple, direct and true.

cgr

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:41 AM on 08/28/2008

While it is true that Bill Clinton is a former President, it is traditional to refer to former presidents, when addressing them directly, as President or Mr. President regardless of their current status. As for language representing reality, you are mistaking the map for the territory.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:25 AM on 08/28/2008
- cgr I'm a Fan of cgr permalink

"When addressing them directly", yes.

When writing about them, reality is better represented by "former President".

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:54 PM on 08/28/2008

"How, then, does "black" become the label as who he is?"
-Because if you didn't know who he was and he passed you in the street, that's what would go through your mind.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:25 AM on 08/28/2008
- cgr I'm a Fan of cgr permalink

That doesn't wash. Though I'm Scottish/Czech, I've been mistaken time after time for American Indian. By your logic, insisting that's American Indian is who I am, and labeling me American Indian henceforth would be reasonable. ?!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:52 PM on 08/28/2008

President Bill Clinton is still referred to as such because once you are POTUS you may retain the title for life. You can retain the office for only 2 full terms.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:31 PM on 08/28/2008

I really can't stand it when people call black people "a black." I have NEVER read anyone describe a white person as "a white." It's degrading and dehumanizing and you people should cut it out.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:26 AM on 08/28/2008

I think African-American is a joke of a label more than black.

Is Obama an African-American? No, he didn't grow up in Africa . . . he is from Hawaii or Chicago . . .sounds America to me.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:30 AM on 08/28/2008
photo

I am a German American but was not born in Germany. We have Italian Americans, Irish Americans, so African American is definately appropriate. It is much more appropriate than labeling someone by skin color. We are all Americans but we all have an ethnic heritage.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:42 AM on 08/28/2008

The point is identity: a person of Italian decent is considered an "Italian-American", a person of Irish descent is considered an "Irish-American", but previous to the term African-American, any person of color was lumped into a non-descript bucket labeled "black".

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:31 AM on 08/28/2008

I am white so I don't feel I should have input in what you want to be called. Similarly, I comment at AmericaBlog quite frequently, but as a heterosexual, I very seldom make a comment on gay/lesbian issues because I have no stake in them. Being 65 years old, though, I have to tell you that I have lived through several name changes. It was "Negroes" when I was growing up, then in the sixties "black" was the politically correct term, and later "African-American" or the more inclusive term "people of color" were preferred. I am willing to go along with whatever you want, but people do get in the habit of using one term and they slip up when something new comes along. It's the saw about how you can't teach an old dog new tricks. What I think is really stupid, however, is this compunction to refer to someone as a "black", Obama, for example. It's obvious to sight and gratuitous and unnecessary. You are right, I have never heard Hillary Clinton referred to as a white.

Myself, I am half Serbian and half Macedonian by descent. But I never refer to myself as a Serbo-Macedonian-American or a Yugoslav-American or a white. I am just an American like you.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:37 AM on 08/28/2008

I believe a fundamental mistake is being made in your conclusions describing each party. You are basing your fundamentals on a clean slate rather than the current economic and foreign policy conditions. For example I (D) and many of my friends (R) have grown more passionate about this election because of the government's recent history of executive orders circumventing the laws and because of the constitutional "interpretations" twisting laws to meet their needs. We have moved down a path in the wrong direction and having a democrat in the WH and Congress (for me) is about reeling back these efforts and "rebuilding" the constitution and the laws to the form they were originally intended. The Geneva Convention too. Torture? Phone tapping? Library records? Internet censorship? They've used security threats as an excuse to change the fundamental freedoms of our country. We must start by getting that back to where it was intended. Next, let's trade occupation of Iraq for investment in our infrastructure (roads, bridges, New Orleans, etc.). Then we can build a position of power around the globe by enlisting our friends, attracting new friends, and squeezing our enemies.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:21 AM on 08/28/2008

I hear the Democrats talk about universal health care a lot this election season, we really need to put aside "feelings" and "fairness" on this debate and take a look at if we can actually afford it. Medicare has already set us on the path of $35+ TRILLION in unfender liabilities and that only covers 45 million people . . . no chance of adding another 280 million people, we will collapse under a mountain of debt.

Take a few minutes and listen to David Walker who was our Comptroller General and ran the GAO.

If you have time watch these as well:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OS2fI2p9iVs

America's future finances:
Part 1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIgrxpp97OQ
Part 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXr_Ga_n0pY

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:18 AM on 08/28/2008

Ensuring healthcare for all is not necessarily going to be a "government freebie" like Medicare, etc. I think the effort here is to make it affordable, having costs come back down to reality while sharing the burden among corporations, worker, non-worker and government. Aspirin in a hospital should not cost $35. The solution is to focus on all things wrong about the current HC industry, including insurance, supplies, manufacturing, etc. and find a compromise between suppliers and customers.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:28 AM on 08/28/2008

Ensuring healthcare for all is not necessarily going to be a "government freebie"

What about the poor people then? What about the illegals? What about the people that spent all their money on a new TV or some rims?

Are we just going to let them die in the streets? No, we'll be paying for it.

Government has proven it is something that cannot take on a large project without massive waste . . . look at schools, medicare, social security or the military.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:33 AM on 08/28/2008
photo

How in the hell can every other industrialized nation on the planet afford it, but we can't??

Ireland is richer than us?

Holland?

England for Christ's sake?

Canada?

Japan?

This is such a tired argument.

So, America must let some of it people (45 million) go with out health care because we are too poor of a nation to afford it???????????????????

I can't believe this argument still gets traction.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:30 AM on 08/28/2008

Watch the video please, it will help you understand the unfunded liabilities of Medicare alone. It is quite scary how blind Washington is to this.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:34 AM on 08/28/2008
photo

The biggest obstacle to universal healthcare in the US is the mindset that rejects a system where the haves help the have-nots. It smacks of socialism which is a dirty word in America. It's a strange paradox that a nation that prides itself on its christian values considers healthcare a privilege, not a right.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:51 PM on 08/28/2008

If we can affored to spend FOUR BILLION DOLLARS A WEEK in IRAQ, we can afford Universal Health Care.

If we can give Billions of Dollars in Tax Breaks to Big Oil and Big Corps that Ship Jobs overseas, We can afford Universal Health Care.

If we can Bail Out Wall Street We can Bail out Main Street and give ordinary americans a Chance at LIFE.

Universal Health Care is a Life and Death issue. It is NOT a privilege and it MUST not be negotiable.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:43 AM on 08/28/2008

Ahh, you might want to watch the video quickly to get a real understanding of our finances. You could cut our entire war, military and defense budget and still couldn't cover universal health care.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:10 AM on 08/28/2008

The problem is not whether we can afford universal healthcare or not. WE can. The problem all these years is the inequality of the rich and poor class that has polarized our nation. The republicans who just want to see the rich get richer are the only ones that benefited from this system. Thats why it seems that we can't afford it because we are all lead to believe that we can't.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:05 AM on 08/28/2008

Can we afford the $35 trillion in unfinded liabilities for Medicare?

FYI, our GDP is around $11 trillion.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:18 AM on 08/28/2008

Germany, Great Britain, France, the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Austrailia, to name but a few, can afford it. Unbias, you're always opening your yap about how great we are. Aren't we at least as great as the aformentioned? If we stopped spending 10 billion a month on illegal wars we could too and do a lot of other things that would improve the lives of ALL citizens and not just arms contractors.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:31 AM on 08/28/2008

Combine all those countries and you still don't have the same population as the USA . . .

10 billion a month would even touch the bill.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:34 PM on 08/28/2008

The young people will save us, I have faith in them.. A great bunch!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:00 AM on 08/28/2008

Like the young, keep dreaming. Soon we will have a one party system. What Leftist dream about.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:17 AM on 08/28/2008

There will never be a one party system because you have 2 groups in this country . . . one that pays the taxes and the other that uses them without paying. The ones that pay the taxes don't get much back while those that don't pay get a free lunch.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:23 AM on 08/28/2008
photo

Relax, if the proletarian revolution was ever going to come to America, then it would have made it already.

lol

The G.I. Bill, Welfare, child labor laws, women's vote, civil rights, work place safety legislation, domestic violence laws, social security, unemployment insurance, student loans, Americans with disabilities act, and on and on. Most Americans take for granted the accomplishments of liberals in this country. Most Americans would say that most of these things are not liberal, but are now just considered "American."

It is not about bringing socialism or communism to the USA, for God's sake, it is about the government actually serving the people---instead of the richest 1%. None of the accomplishments about serve the richest 1%--so the right wing fought against all of them.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:38 AM on 08/28/2008

Hey there! Guess what? We do have a one party system. Its run by the republican party - the party of the minority. Why do you think we only had 2 democratic presidents in the last 3 decades? If I'm not mistaken the republican party in 2001 controlled congress and the Whitehouse and inherited a surplus in the budget. Guess what they did with that?

We want our country back. We can't afford another 4 years of McBush running our nation down the drain again.

I'm more than happy to give our young people a chance to run our country. They can at least use the computer and are in touch with what's going on in America compared to the republicans.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:11 AM on 08/28/2008

Oh yeah? What about "Permanent Republican Majorities"? ReckingBall? Do you mean Wrecking?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:39 AM on 08/28/2008
photo

ReckingBall, practicing Rovian tactics. It is her party, the GOP, that dreams of a one party system.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:54 PM on 08/28/2008

I resent the pigeonholing and stereotyping of the electorate represented in this post. First of all, not all of Obama's white supporters are "well-off". I, myself am a testament to that and I know of many other white people who are not wealthy who support Barack. Furthermore, the idea of poor or struggling working men and women supporting McCain and the Republicans is baffling to me, considering the awful shape of the economy. What has the Bush administration done for the working man? Prices are rising, home foreclosures are in record numbers and the price of gas is outrageous. John McCain would only continue the tax cuts for the wealthy and boosts for big oil that we have seen from George Bush. Also, it doesn't matter whether you are a struggling working class guy or a college educated person doing relatively well, most of us want to end the war in Iraq. It seems odd to talk about "Reagan Democrats" when the Reagan administration was over 20 years ago. This is 2008, and most people are ready to move on!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:51 AM on 08/28/2008

I understand your confusion, but what Bush et al have done for the white blue collar males is promise to end abortion. That's all it takes with much of that crowd. it is a symbol of their desire to get back to the '50s when men were men and women, blacks, hispanics "new their place."

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:16 AM on 08/28/2008
photo

Unfortunately, the demographic for right wing radio is the white working class. The Conservative did a great job securing their propaganda machine over the last 30 years.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:24 AM on 08/28/2008

And the Demographic for daytime television is women and minorities . . . do you hear people on the right trying to ban the view?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:37 AM on 08/28/2008
photo

"Young people do not believe John McCain can bring about change."

NOBODY believes John McCain can bring about change, or that he even wants to.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:40 AM on 08/28/2008

I don't believe McCain can bring change but I also don't like Obama's change . . .

Neither of these guys has a plan to reduce government spending which is going to kill us at some point.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:26 AM on 08/28/2008

About reducing the killing budget and fund the people budget with health care higher education etc?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:02 AM on 08/28/2008


Pfffft! Like you really care about government spending. Lets focus on the economy which is heart of the concerns of normal, American voters. McCain is only fooling you with an economic plan that won't work.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:25 AM on 08/28/2008
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next › Last » (4 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in  or  Connect

 
Right Now on HuffPost
MAYHEM IN HONDURAS

TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras — Ousted President Manuel...

Biden: "We Misread How Bad The Economy Was"

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration "misread" the depth...