andie nachgeborenen wrote:
>I of all people make no excuses for Dems, but 70% of the public
>supports this way. Those are hard numbers for politician to
>disregard. jks
-There's a lot of ambivalence and complexity behind those numbers. And -if someone prominent managed to articulate that, the poll numbers -might look different.
But that begs the question of timing-- a lot of Dems may rightly feel that full support now will put them in a better position to criticize latter the results and have sympathy from the public. Defectors from policy actually get a greater hearing in the public debate that those who were right all along; it may suck but it's a reality.
Those who criticize the Dems put a lot of faith in the idea that the masses are hanging on their words-- I actually think that most politicians have a more realistic view that they are far more likely to be overwhelmed by the vagaries of public opinion than effect it themselves.
It's mass movements that have far more effect on public opinion over time. My basic view has always been that we (and evolving facts on the ground) are the ones who change the opinion environment, and then the politicians follow. I just don't have the same expectations of politician-based leadership that this kind of criticism emphasizes.
-- Nathan Newman