I confess a "politics is local" perspective on this that probably does not translate to the national level where it looks like we more or less have some kind of gridlock no matter the outcome in Florida.
In Virginia we have gone from a 12 year period of not too bad rule by moderate Demos to a situation where we have total domination by the Repugs, with a big faction of bible thumpers involved (we are the home state of both Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson). One personal upshot is that the Repug governors have been paying off the Christian Right by appointing them to state university oversight boards. We've got one attacking gay and lesbian literature courses. At already pretty right-wing George Mason they are doing a lot more.
Apologies if my discussion has been distorted by this unpleasant local perspective. But, I would warn to those who say "it can't happen here," that it can. Barkley Rosser -----Original Message----- From: J. Barkley Rosser, Jr. <rosserjb at jmu.edu> To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com> Date: Thursday, November 09, 2000 2:44 PM Subject: Re: election demographics
> Byrd machine remarks refer to Virginia.
>Barkley Rosser
>-----Original Message-----
>From: J. Barkley Rosser, Jr. <rosserjb at jmu.edu>
>To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com>
>Date: Thursday, November 09, 2000 1:46 PM
>Subject: Re: election demographics
>
>
>>Justin,
>> Well, how about George McGovern? Couldn't
>>even take his own state. Just another wanker, eh?
>> I was not here then, but his run triggered the shift
>>of the Byrd machine from the Demos to the Repugs,
>>who now control not only the legislature, but all the
>>top offices in the state without having gone Demo
>>for prez since LBJ. Lot more of that went on.
>> Now, this did not keep me from being a policy
>>adviser for old George when he ran again in 1984 as
>>the "conscience of the Democratic Party." For those
>>who remember his debate performance in Iowa that
>>year (came in third in the caucuses), I was the author
>>of his proposal to cut the DOD budget by $ 63 billion
>>that he trumpeted then. Oh well....
>>Barkley Rosser
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Justin Schwartz <jkschw at hotmail.com>
>>To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com>
>>Date: Wednesday, November 08, 2000 5:26 PM
>>Subject: Re: election demographics
>>
>>
>>>I still haven't provided the figures, but there is an obvious hypothesis
>to
>>>explain your puzzle. It's not that people have preferred more
conservative
>>>candidates. It's that they haven't been offered more liberal ones. Why
>>>Reagan over Carter, Bush Sr over Dukakis, you ask? The thing is, these
>>>liberals were fleeing liberalism instead of trumpeting it--they treated
it
>>>as something to be ashamed of, and in fact, bought into and reinforced
ana
>>>ggressively conservative rhetoric. There is an old (1960s, I think) book
>on
>>>what Americans really think that I liked, can't remember the authors or
>>>title, have it around here somewhere, that argued that Americans go in
for
>>>conservative global rhetoric and liberal concrete policies. --jks
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Here then is the puzzle: how is it a gradually more liberal electorate
>>>>prefers to elect increasingly conservative candidates? There's got
>>>>to be some additional dimension here that slice and dice the meanings
>>>>and
>>>>causes of liberalism and conservativism into contradictory fragments.
>>>>
>>>>If the electorate now is more liberal than the ones electing Johnson
>>>>or Kennedy, which helps explain how or why Nixon expanded the social
>>>>welfare state, how is it that a Democratic President feels compelled
>>>>to latch onto something like welfare reform because it's seen consistent
>>>>with the mood of the people?
>>>>
>>>>Dennis Breslin
>>>
>>>_________________________________________________________________________
>>>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>>>
>>>Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
>>>http://profiles.msn.com.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>