America: A potential spectrum shift to the left?

[Kuya]

The IMF is also famous for telling poorer countries how they need to open their markets and privatize more and more, while the richer countries to the opposite.

[Stiker]

Stopped reading here. This is a presumption that is inaccurate. Obama won and the election wasn't THAT much of a landslide. He ran a far superior campaign. I think that had McCain picked a guy like Jindal as a running mate instead of the immensely polarizing Palin, or had Clinton won the nomination or had Obama not caught lightning in a bottle so well that the republicans were within reach of the whitehouse again.

There is still a significant- not fringe- segment of the population that supported these conservative ideals.

There is a general trend over the years of a move towards the left. There may be some jogs to the right here and there but as a whole over the last 100 years we as a society have steadily inched left. Nothing new here.

Pretty much my thoughts on this as well. I honestly don't see much change from the usual in American politics. You will always have your right and left in somewhat even numbers, and the swing voters in the middle. This time the swing just happened to go left -- whether or not it swings there again won't be apparent until the mid-term elections and maybe not even until the 2012 election.

I think the bigger statement this election had was that American voters wanted exactly what Obama's campaign slogan was: "Change". To say the least, people became rather disenchanted with the direction of the GOP and how the country was being run. As a result, you get the election results you see now.

Someone said this before in another thread, but it should be repeated IMO. I really don't think the two main parties really allow many Americans to completely identify with them. Personally, I have been able to vote in two general elections and each time I voted for the ticket I disagreed with the least each time (even though this is a rather wasted vote since I am in Texas -- doesn't matter which party I vote for either). My personal opinions on politics though has never changed despite that.

It is really hard to judge social change as a political spectrum move to the left. If you take a look at history, America has always been socially progressive -- even if we are behind other countries on this and are quite slow on it. I really don't see anything new to be honest.

[0ni0n]

What change do you expect to the IMF and how the obama administration deliver that change?

[Kuya]

The IMF should not even exist, and no US executive is ever going to do anything to "change" it, the very act of mentioning such a thing as a hypothetical possibility is nonsensical.

[ozz]

so i guess i'm out of the loop on all this, what's marx's plan for paying off the national debt when the interest on it exceeds total tax revenue?

[Crouchingllama]

I think it's safe to say that the social conservatism of the Silent Majority, Reagan's America, and the fundie-right that got Bush elected is history.

It's way to early to say this, the margin too small and the percentage of overall voters still really too low to say America's shifting to the left, only part of it did. Unfortunately, too many people vote with the Republicans on a few main issues without fully realizing they're being used by the big money people/companies to power agendas that probably over half of the Republican voting block just doesn't understand or doesn't care about. The power of the Religious Right voting block isn't dead, but they don't seem to care or understand that the Republicans writing the laws that favor the big corporations and the rich don't really give a crap when those laws cause the shut down of a factory that had over 60% Republican leaning workers...

In short, too many Republican voters don't get that they're being used, so the GOP isn't going away. (Yes, I realize that the Dems could be accused of the same thing.)

[Demosthenes11]

way too many assumptions made. way too many

[Crouchingllama]

Mine, in the post above? Yes, but that's also the point I'm trying to make about the OP, though the OP asked for speculation on a possible shift to the left, as much as I'd personally like that, I just don't see it really happening, even long-term. Until everyone in America really pays attention to every issue like a well-educated and well-informed policy wonk does, the voting population is probably going to be too small to really be an accurate gauge of what people would really think if they knew everything about every issue.

Yes, I know, it's unrealistic and unreasonable and hypocritical of me to even think that would be slightly possible, let alone probable. It's part of being American that you don't HAVE to vote, imo, however, it's silly not to, but it's also silly to vote and have no clue about what you're voting for and why you're voting for/against it. I don't expect that we'll ever have a VOTING population that really understands their own motivation for voting well enough, let alone the entire country voting, even if it was just for the tallest or most good looking candidate, because that's never been a factor, has it?

But maybe we can say that in general, the divide between red states and blue states is a fundamental difference in people like some scientists say there's always progressives and traditionalists in every society, the bent to make the next better mousetrap and the fear of things that are new. The idea is that the people who want to lurch ahead are in general held in check by people wanting no changes to the "current traditions". I think in a very general way, this connection can be made between red and blue states, or at least it works for me. Maybe I'm being overly simplistic, that's happened before.

[Ryko]

Stopped reading here..

And where have you been? I stay up all night slaving over a hot stove and this is what I get?

[ZarakiKujata]

I think the whole America as a center right nation is such a load of shit. It's just that because of people like Richard Viguerie starting in the 60s and 70s the conservative movement was able to organize themselves a lot more efficiently then liberals, something even he has noted (progressives don't get angry the way conservatives do so its hard to adapt conservative fund raising styles to moderate/liberal/progressive causes). I think if anything the large rise in independent voters and just generally unaffliated people shows that the largely apathetic liberals/moderates in this country who previously hadn't voted have just started to in 2004-2008.

More specifically, there definitely is a confluence of certain trends that bodes well for the left side of the political spectrum. I'm talking about things like the youth of this country being more active then at any time since the 1960s. Also, the median age for am talk radio listeners being 67(I remember seeing FOX New's having a similiar skewed demo) and how Nate Silver pointed out that every year that passes gay marriage is just gonna keep getting easier to pass as "silent majority" types of all colors/creeds but particularly white christians die off.

[Beckwin]

Ok Guartz, you do make a more than fair point about the IMF- my fault for assuming you were alluding at Bilderberger/NWO type international conspiracy stuff rather than class oppression and neocolonialism (but can you really blame me? lol).

Nystul: the public opinion has shifted it's support for the war(s) in the past couple years, now demands answers for torture, strongly dislikes the PATRIOT act, is tired of corporate handouts, and many have argued that bringing in Palin and pandering to the social hard-right was what lost it for McCain... essentially, remaining in the Bush zone (outside the American spectrum) rather than being more center-right.

I think it's worth pointing out that the currently disastrous state of the mainstream right-leaning party along with them losing a major voting bloc in the next 20 years may open quite the opportunity. I pointed the several examples popular left-leaning opinions/events to show a strong overall lean starting to develop, perhaps like we saw in the 60s. Now in the 60s, they certainly made some progress left, but were ultimately quashed by Dick Nixon and his Silent Majority... the question is, will that happen again? I want to say no, because the GOP is in shambles, and the Silent Majority is soon to be extinct- but that could just be my optimistic side coming through.

I do agree with guartz and kuya about social changes coming first. I think that's a necessary first step, as I've said before. I theorize that a few generations of more progressive social policy will lead to the emergence of more people, and leaders, who become critical of the current government, fiscal/economic, and international affairs statii quo, and then we start to hopefully see significant changes.

creeps, you actually had a fairly good point about major changes and destabilization/suffering, at least for the US. I think other countries have made shifts to the left without so much turmoil though.

I largely agree with the idea that we aren't going to see radical changes anytime soon, but we do appear to potentially be on a track to emulate some of the European democracies.

[Beckwin]

so i guess i'm out of the loop on all this, what's marx's plan for paying off the national debt when the interest on it exceeds total tax revenue?

make money stop existing.

biggie saw the same problem with money; marx solved it 150+ years ago dawg.




AND IN RELATED NEWS:

Obama just eliminated abstinence-only funding from the budget.

[Bingbong]

I think that this is just the latest swing in the cycle that is the American political landscape.

The party in charge during a bad crisis (military or economic) usually finds themselves on the outside looking in for the next few years. It's all cyclical, and it will come back around, again and again, and again.

[ozz]

make money stop existing.

biggie saw the same problem with money; marx solved it 150+ years ago dawg.

Genius. Tell china we don't use money anymore, so we can give them as much valueless currency as they want us to to pay off our debts...i'm sure that'll go over great with them and the rest of the people we owe money to. They'll probably forgive the debts anyway when they see that we've reformed our barbaric ways so dramatically

[Beckwin]

don't act offended that I gave a flippant, ridiculous response when you fielded a pretty ridiculous and far out hypothetical situation.

we only paid 249B out of 3 trillion budget/2.5 trillion revenue last year on interest; we're far far away from even thinking about our interest obligations being more than our revenue.

[Darus Grey]

I think the whole America as a center right nation is such a load of shit. It's just that because of people like Richard Viguerie starting in the 60s and 70s the conservative movement was able to organize themselves a lot more efficiently then liberals, something even he has noted (progressives don't get angry the way conservatives do so its hard to adapt conservative fund raising styles to moderate/liberal/progressive causes). I think if anything the large rise in independent voters and just generally unaffliated people shows that the largely apathetic liberals/moderates in this country who previously hadn't voted have just started to in 2004-2008.

More specifically, there definitely is a confluence of certain trends that bodes well for the left side of the political spectrum. I'm talking about things like the youth of this country being more active then at any time since the 1960s. Also, the median age for am talk radio listeners being 67(I remember seeing FOX New's having a similiar skewed demo) and how Nate Silver pointed out that every year that passes gay marriage is just gonna keep getting easier to pass as "silent majority" types of all colors/creeds but particularly white christians die off.

This is pretty much it...America has always been a left leaning nation(up to 80% of country at times), the issue is that politics favors conservatives and reality favors liberals. If the democratic voting base turned out in the same percentage as the republicans did...there'd never be a single republican person in office...ever.

[Beckwin]

oh and in further response to Nystul, the electorate booted out quite a few (more) GOPers from Congress, further signifying a rejection of the past 8 years.

[Skjie]

Nationalism brought on by "terrorism" pulled American further right then it would generally tend settle. Bush worked hard to keep the Nationalistic fervour as long as he could, but with Obama the pressure is releasing, causing American politics to settle back to normal.

Skimmed the thread, sorry if I missed someone else saying this.

[sephir]

I don't think the whole spectrum has shifted, I just think people wanted something different from what Bush/Mccain and the GOP were offering. Its true the Obama administration is the most liberal administration in your history and most of the public seems to back him (sky high approval ratings) you still see high attendance at many conservative events.
Another thing I'm noticing just by watching the news is how radical some of the conservatives are getting, I mean I never would have ever thought a governor would talk about secession even in a joking fashion, and the branding of Obama as (a) socialist/communist/Hitler is utterly ridiculous. Even if you don't agree with the candidate who won, you should at least show respect. But on the other hand, if the radical group of right wingers continue it could disenfranchise many right leaning people who may then vote the other way.

[Olo401]

Edit: I have to say it - this thread is great. Excellent topic of discussion, going beyond the regular politcal chatter we have here.

A major significance of Obama's election, if not the major significance, is how in my opionion, it signaled a popular rejection of politics to the right of center-right.

Actually I think ideology was a lesser, but not minor factor in elections since the 2006 cycle. The more prominent factors in my opinion are the constant appearance of greed, corruption, incompetence, blatant disregard and open animosity for dissenting opinions even inside the Republican Party. They made every single American, especially those who continued to support Bush for so long, look like a domestic violence victim. And don't even get me started on what we looked like to our own allies.

The American people didn't necessarily want a Democrat, or even a leftist, in the White House. They simply wanted someone who wasn't greedy, or partisan, or flippant; who was more pragmatic and open to criticism yet still had a forceful get-it-done personality. McCain could have done that, I truly believe he could have. It would have made this election much closer than it was. Instead he either chose to follow the same path as his ideological brethren, or was too weak-minded to determine his own path and was led to his defeat. We didn't reject the politics, we rejected the attitude.

The American people have rejected all that. The question is, does that alone signify a spectrum shift to the left?

No.

I partially agree with you here. It does signify a shift yes, but the shift itself will take many years to complete and it depends on what happens to the Republican Party in the next few years. Right now, all of the things I mentioned above that led to their recent defeats continue and have become even more visible (except the corruption, which is probably much less now that their prominence in government has shrunken so much). Despite the fact that they have been so thoroughly rejected on their own "merits", they continue to stick to the same lines and continue to purge those who do not follow the party line 100%.

I can only see this ending one way - a new centrist-libertarian coalition party will be formed and the ultra-conservatives left in the GOP will be swept away to history. At this rate, I give it about 5-10 years. I also don't expect the Democratic Party to continue in its current form either - it is too constrained by people whose personal intersts is too forceful to govern properly or efficiently. I expect, or at least hope, at some point a centrist-based pragmatic party will be started by people of my generation and younger who want to look beyond partisanship towards practicality and actually make government work for the people again. If that's considered a center-left alignment, then so be it. And if it's going to happen, it'll be in the next 20-25 years while there's space leftover from the fall of the GOP and the influence from Obama's seemingly dynamic political style is still fresh.