Was "The Emerging Democratic Majority" wrong?

[Woodstock]

The authors argued good things were around the corner for Democrats, as their base would increase in the years ahead. Now that Californians are about to elect a sexist Adolph Hitler fan of a Republican movie actor as governor, I'm feeling a bit discouraged. What's next, will California be one of the red states in the 2004 presidential election? Despite the absolutely horrible, not to mention illegal, things the Bush Administration has done, the working class still seems to back Bush, who does everything in his power to doom them. Is the book full of beans? It made so much sense as I read it, now I'm not so sure. I did find this site by one of the authors:

http://www.emergingdemocraticmajority.com/

One of the authors (Teixera) seems to think things are on track (or is he still trying to sell books?) He says he thinks we'll hold the blue states and are poised to pick up some red states:

AZ: 34 percent say they would vote to re-elect Bush; 44 percent say they would vote for somebody else

CA: Bush overall job rating at 46 percent, on Iraq at 40 percent and below 40 on the economy, environment, health care, reducing unemployment and the budget deficit.

CO: 42 percent would vote to re-elect Bush; 35 percent to replace him

IO: 41 percent say they would vote to re-elect Bush; 41 percent say they would vote for the Democrat

MI: 44 percent say they would vote to re-elect Bush; 49 percent say they would vote for somone else

NM: 40 percent say they would vote to re-elect Bush; 43 percent would vote for another candidate

[diplomats]

1. It's too early to draw any conclusions

I imagine it will take years to see if their premise is correct.

[Woodstock]

2. The author also has misgivings about Dean's electability:

http://www.emergingdemocraticmajority.com/donkey/drjuly16_22_2003.cfm

[West Coast Democrat]

3. Gray Davis was the fairly elected Governor

if Arnold wins, it won't have anything to do with whether or not there's a Democratic majority in California.

[Woodstock]

4. OK, but what about the Dems voting for the recall

Last I heard (correct me if I'm wrong) 20% of Dems are voting for the recall - knowing Arnold is the frontrunner/likely replacement.

[Classical_Liberal]

10. He is unpopular

It has nothing to do with ideology.

[Code_Name_D]

24. I don't think so.

Don't forget, the recall was rigged by the Bush admin. But they couldn't get away with it if Davis wasn't in a stronger position. Davis is a DLC dem, and seems more intrested in going along to get along. And it seems that Califonains deeply resent it. And the DNC happen to be in such a bad position stratigicly, that they have no means to addiqetly respond. The Rank and file dem has to get their party line through the "libiral biased medea" for God's sake. (The Dems have taken CA for granted for some time.)

I'll give Davis a few marks for fight recently. But its too little, too late. That is why he is being recalled.

[Classical_Liberal]

31. I agree with this

I am surprised you not getting flamed and stalked for thinking so.

[Code_Name_D]

38. Na, bagging on Davis is perfictly accetible.

It's bagging on Clark that gets me the stalkers. But I was a dallnet#politics refigee. The DU is a walk in the park compared to some of the chat rooms I used to reguler.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

20. If you note the post right below yours, it is because people are morons

who are sucked in by bullshit...that's why people are voting for Arnold besides the fact that NONE of the candidates had to DEBATE Davis:

here's some info..I am NOW cutting and pasting because I TIRE of repeating myself..Dems who VOTE for a Republican are MORONS or stinking rich. I am sure a certain other poster will rebut this with a one line post since she KNOWs so much about MY state

I am working at 7 pm on a Friday night after phoning union members all day, I am tired and I am sick of repeating myself. but first let me just say that I am as guikty as the next person of speaking on DU in platitudes. The whole conversation was framed by the energy crisis and I did NOT compare the years prior to Davis' term with his predecessors in a manner everyone could get soon enough.

One BIG reason Arnold will get elected is because he got a FREE PASS AND did NOT debate Davis so he was able to capitalize on that and NOT HAVE TO PROVE himself. What people do NOT realize is that he is GOING to HAVE to CUT THEIR FIRE DEPT, POLICE, or other services and RAISE TAXES..especially if he gives up the 4 billion on the car tax...here is my post from the other thread. Although I COPIED some of it from Davis's campaign site, I would like to underscore that I was PRESENT in SACRAMENTO in public hearings for MOST of the labor related laws:

editorial note: I was respinding to another Du'er who said the Dems need to give the GREENS something to vote for
Yeah Davis has done things that MIGHT have not been appropriate and i say MIGHT with a HUGE fucking disclaimer since one has yet to see what would happen with a Green candidate in a MAJOR position of power ( I might add that I witnessed first hand that the PEOPLE party in Mexico PAN got into power and ORGANIZED crimes was supplanted by DISORGANIZED crime)

We live in a state with some of the MOSt liberal labor protections in the nation. Even if Bush PASSED the overtime law it would NOT apply in California where we HAVE protected the 8 hour work day and we are NOT a right to work state.

People here who are injured on the job still get to CHOOSE their own physician after 30 days of control by the carrier. The benefit of that is that one does not have a doctor beholden to the carrier for business shortchanging them on their disability.

These are things to vote for...can a SINGLE GREEN tell me Camejo could get MORE cooperation given the HUGE influence agriculture and law enforecement have in this state even WITHOUT campaing contributions? What do they think Camejo will be able to do? Govern by FIAT?? It's NOT gonna happen

anyway here's just a few reasons that don't seem to be enough:
GREEN ENERGY POLICY

Today, non-hydro renewable energy provides a greater percentage of California’s power supply than it does in any other state in the nation.
Created an $850-million energy conservation program – the largest in state history.
Expressed his support for increasing statewide usage of renewable power from 12 to 17 percent by 2006. Provided more than $350 million in budget funding for the development of renewable power.
Directed the new California Power Authority to make a steady increase in the use of renewable power a priority.
Provided more than $47 million in incentives for the purchase of zero
SMART GROWTH

Closed a loophole allowing developers to subdivide large properties, circumventing environmental and zoning laws.
Signed legislation requiring major new housing developments to identify a source of water prior to construction.
Signed legislation to promote cleanup and redevelopment of urban brownfields.

CHILDREN'S ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH

Unveiled a new plan in 2002 to expand the existing Childhood Lead Poisoning Program.
The Governor provided support for clean-up of hazardous substances at school sites and to evaluate air quality in portable classrooms.
Broadened air quality standards to evaluate health risks to children (in addition to adults).
Signed the Healthy Schools Act to reduce pesticide use in schools.

ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY

Setting the national standard for environmental justice.


Governor Davis established some of the toughest environmental health laws in the nation to regulate toxic mold, Chromium 6, and arsenic.
Signed ground-breaking environmental justice legislation, setting the national standard for long-range planning and environmental guidelines.

COASTAL PROTECTION

An unprecedented commitment to California’s coast.
Governor Davis has provided $107 million to clean up coastal pollution and reduce the number of beach closure days.
Signed legislation strengthening beach and coastal protections.
Filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Interior to block additional offshore oil drilling.
Vetoed the “Rigs-to-Reefs” bill which would have allowed oil companies to leave decommissioned oil platforms in place.

WATER QUALITY

California is the first state in the nation to meet certain federal clean water standards, using an innovative approach addressing both inland and coastal pollution in one program.
Supported and actively campaigned for Proposition 13, which earmarks $1.9 billion for water supply reliability, safe drinking water, flood control, and water conservation projects.
Signed the toughest water quality enforcement law in the nation requiring mandatory penalties for pollution.
Negotiated with U.S. Department of the Interior to address California’s water supply, water quality, and ecosystem restoration needs through the CALFED Bay-Delta program – the nation’s most comprehensive water management system.
$21.3 million in the 2001-02 budget for water quality efforts, including reducing pollution from dairies and storm water.
Governor Davis ordered the phase-out of the hazardous fuel additive MTBE, and petitioned the U.S. EPA to grant a waiver allowing California to bypass requirements for oxygen in gas, on the grounds that it would be counter productive and add unnecessary cost.
Provided $13.5 million in the 2001-02 budget to preserve and restore wetlands around Lake Tahoe.

Overtime Expansion

The Industrial Welfare Commission, whose members are appointed by the governor to reflect the interests of the public, labor and business, extended overtime to hundreds of thousands of workers in California who never before received it. Overtime was extended to the construction, drilling, logging, and mining industries.

Raising the State’s Minimum Wage

California’s minimum wage earners received a pay increase. Governor Davis approved an increase in the state minimum wage from $5.75 to $6.25 effective Jan. 1, 2001. An additional $.50 increase was approved effective Jan. 1, 2002.

Caesar Chavez Holiday

Honoring the founder and long-time leader of the United Farmworkers of America, the governor signed a bill declaring March 31, as Cesar Chavez Day in California. The bill, establishing the first paid state holiday in the nation to recognize Chavez, also requires the development of a curriculum to teach children about non-violence and economic justice, and encourages students to participate in community service activities through AmeriCorps and the California Conservation Corps.

Farm Worker Housing

Mindful of those workers who drive the economic engine of California’s Central Valley, the governor signed legislation that provides $500,000 in tax credits to builders of farm worker housing, another bill that increases family services for farm workers and their families and improves the safety of farm labor vehicles.

Child Care

The governor approved measures that expand the resources necessary to retain qualified child care employees in state-subsidized centers, and that require the state to develop recommendations for playground safety requirements at licensed child care centers.

Labor Law Enforcement

The governor signed legislation strengthening labor law enforcement and increasing penalties for employers who do not pay wages to their workers, and approved a measure that strengthens employment protections for people with disabilities.

Binding Arbitration

Governor Davis approved a binding arbitration process for firefighters and law enforcement employees that preserves the rights of these employees while offering consistent protection of the public.

Workplace Safety

Governor Davis approved increases in funding for Cal/OSHA to improve workplace safety, targeting employers with the highest proportion of fatalities, injuries, illness and workers’ compensation losses.

Young worker safety

The governor approved a statewide young worker health and safety resource network, which will increase the ability of young workers and their communities to identify and address workplace hazards for protecting young workers from on-the-job injuries/illnesses.

I might add that since I was IN PUBLIC HEARINGS in Sacramento for MOST of the labor law issues, I challenge ONE GREEN to demonstrate that a single ONE of those ISSUES was championed by a REPUBLICAN>

No the greens will say..but a contributor of Davis' polluted and he didn't lock them up....I agree that was a mistake however A) the amoutn contributed was OVERBLOWN, b) the perpetrator got heavily fined and there was NO evidence that DAVIS had anything to do with interfering.

Arnold is taking AIM at CAL EPA..because of the TECH and DEFENSE industries, this state deals with approximately 170 toxic chemicals that other states do NOT address. I CHALLENGE A SINGLE GREEN TO PROVE THEY COULD HAVE DONE BETTER with a full HALF of the legislature being Republican for Davis first term.


and from another post

Oh and one more thing..the thing that cracks me up the most


are people who support Howard FUCKING DEAN and Dennis Kucinich saying Gray Davis is TOO conservative. Read the above and you will see why...Davis increased women's rights and INCREASED the minimum wage and INCREASED union participation in the state while taking on OIL, DEVELOPERS and every other big money interest. Ideologically Davis is CLEARLY to the left of both of them but just doesn't seem to resemble Che Guevara enough for some people's tastes...Nevermind that he is governor for a state with 35 fucking million people and half of them are bigots that think every problem we have is because of mexicans (while they eat Taco Bell)

[OHdem10]

5. reply Emerging Dem Majority

The news not covered in 2000 and Bush"s Red States. In almost all the red states nwhere there were Senators and Congressman Races--the races were very close--often so clse that inorder to win the Repblicans had to send in out of stae volunteers and spend large amounts of money at the very end. My point is Yes, Bush did well --bt these states are not necessarity as republican as we were led to believe by the media. Some analysts on C-Span illustrated this most effectively following the election. One example a Democratic woman almost unseated Conrad Burns incumbent republican in Wyoming. The Republicans had to do a real last minute Hail Mary Pass to save Burns seat. This was the case in many of the red staates. We just need to better organize.

Last night I watchd John Zogby on Hardball. To me, Zogby is one of the best and most trusted pollsters we have today. He had just returned from Californis and said we whould not pay too much attention to these polls they are putting out right now. He explained their weakness and said the race is more close than
any poll out there shows. Arnold is not surging as greatly as they would have you believe adn it woud well turn around before election day. He explained this before all these womanizing stories and
the Hitler reference.

We have to be focused and really be willing to sttay unified .

[bluestateguy]

6. reply

I questioned Texiera about his projections last month at the American Political Science Association convention. His replies to me were not very convincing. That is not to say that the book is crap, only that it neglects the importance of the security issue. He seems to think that it will fade. I do not believe it will. The Republicans will not allow it to fade and another 9/11 style attack will only raise the issue's stature further. Democrats must have a clear, convincing alternative on the issue, rather than just hoping it will go away. Wesley Clark may be the man to do it.

[Code_Name_D]

8. Excuse me?

If memory serves, this book was published before 9-11. Exactly how can it talk about nationl security? And this book delt mostly with demgrafics. Security issus is irrelvent here.

Why did you bring this up?

[Woodstock]

13. I'm looking at the book right now

p. 160-161 of the hardback they talk about 9/11:

"In the wake of 9/11...As long as the war was at its height, Bush and the Republicans did not have to pay a political price for continuing to back bigger taax cuts for the weathly or reductions in environmental enforcement. But these kind of positions, and the Republican association with firms like Enron, are likely to resurface... once the public ceases to be preoccupied with the war against terror."

Then they go on to say that if the US scored easy victories in the "war on terror" this would help Bush/Republicans, but if it was more like Vietnam - "protracted fighting and military occupation, and... terrorist reprisals" then "support for Republican foreign policy would erode, leading to a Democratic advantage."

[bluestateguy]

16. BURN!!

That ought to shut him up.

[Code_Name_D]

19. Okay, I stand corect. But

"In the wake of 9/11...As long as the war was at its height, Bush and the Republicans did not have to pay a political price for continuing to back bigger taax cuts for the weathly or reductions in environmental enforcement. But these kind of positions, and the Republican association with firms like Enron, are likely to resurface... once the public ceases to be preoccupied with the war against terror."

Alright. So it dose talk about 9-11. But how is that anything other than the bowing and scraping of the DINOS? This wind kissing dosn't win votes, no mater how many rose peddles are in the air.

[Classical_Liberal]

11. Security issues won't go away, but the republicans aren't

doing well on security, and will do worse if there is another terrorist attack.

[Eloriel]

7. ONLY IF

we can stop the vote suppression and vote fraud from the Republicans, including bogus redistricting, bogus recalls, as well as all the normal vote suppression and vote fraud routines including the wonderful new computerized voting systems.

Eloriel

[Classical_Liberal]

9. Arnold is running as a moderate

. A conservative republican couldn't win California today. So no it isn't wrong.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

21. Arnold is not a moderate, he wants to DO away with Cal EPA

and MAKE LIFE MORE CUSHY for CORPORATIONS. THAT IS NOT MODERATE.

[Classical_Liberal]

27. If he wants to make life more cushy for corporations

why don't you vote for him? They generously provide Californians with 35 million jobs as you pointed out in your other posts. He is running liberal on social issues which makes him moderate republican.

[jbm]

12. I think...

there really is an emerging liberal majority,the problem is a lot of them don't know they belong with the democrats. Many people hear what sounds like a legit argument,and as long as the topic doesn't directly,personaly,and immediately effect their lives,they'll adopt that argument as their opinion on the issue. The repubs have created a false wall that appears to block evolution by flooding the airwaves with arguments that have the appearance of being legit. We've moved progressively forward throughout history,despite a few hesitations along the way. Despite their best efforts,these guys still can't stop progress!

[Woodstock]

14. So they've conned people really well

and I agree. I mean, put the facts on paper without party labels, and show it to the average worker, and of course he/she is going to say to hell with Bush/the Republicans, I'm voting Democratic. But they've got a study out where 70% Fox viewers are misinformed. I guess the book assumed based on party positions, the voting trends would follow. But perhaps the book should have addressed the BRILLIANT con job the Republican party is pulling off. Working class people are actually voting themselves out of clean air and water, educations, jobs, homes, and even Constitutional rights. And with gusto. It's like watching those films of Nazi Germany or Mao's heyday - they are marching with glee to their doom.

[Classical_Liberal]

15. Having a stronger anticorporate agenda would help

The dems won't do that unless we have public financing of campaigns.

[Woodstock]

18. or having a con job of our own would help, too

Why, with most of Hollywood backing us, can't we come up with a con to outcon them? The truth isn't getting through, so can't we use a little psychology of our own? True, they control the media. But damn it, the Dems could do a much better job at outmaneuvering the Republican con. Look at Lott vs. Daschle, for example. When NPR plays both making statements, Lott is loud and blustery with zingers, but Daschle the timid let's play nice mouse, I have to turn up the sound for. I'm not a PR type of person, but damned if I wouldn't fire the lot of them at the DNC.

[Classical_Liberal]

22. Gore bought a network yesterday

which should help. Many of the candidates are wanting to bring back the fairness doctrine. So media is important. Conjobs don't make me feel good. I am suspicious that someone who wins by conning the public will be motivated to do good things when elected.

[Woodstock]

33. I was being facetious

To outcon a con with the truth is what I was driving at.

If the unvarnished truth isn't enough (which is what nice guy Daschle has been saying in those gentlemanly tones) then let's get the truth to them in a way they will listen.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

23. Yes, we should be more anti-corporate so that then even MORE of the

35 million people in the state will be unemployed. I vote for you.

[Classical_Liberal]

25. Whatever

! When you want to talk to someone seriously maybe I will listen.

[Woodstock]

32. Yes, that's what I think it is, too

like No Child Left Behind, Clear Skies Initiative, Healthy Forest Initiative, ...

I mean, who would want to leave a child behind? Clear skies are good. And healthy forests, too.

[Code_Name_D]

39. Not to get too technical here.

But I think what is rising, and what America has always been, has been a position of pragmatisem. An ideaoligy which is less based on any moral pervue, and founded strictly on technical and observable positions. But one that dose not ignore the oppositions position.

For example, libirals and progresive oppose hate speech and expresions of racism. But pragmatist defends these things under freedom of speech and feel that "hate speech" is something that you souldn't be able to prosicute for. That a man can only be held acountable by his actions, and the conseqenxes of thoes actions. no mater how extrem his words may be.

But the same problem remains. How can one be practical, if all of the practical solutions are taken off the table?

[Code_Name_D]

17. No, and yes.

I haven't read the material, but I do know about its message and some of the conclusions. Conclusions that are backed up by some impressive statistical foundations. Impressive enough that the DLC touted it as evidence that their leadership was seeing results.

And I actually think that 9-11 and the Bush's administration may have accelerated this trend. But I think that is has more to do with the incompetence displayed by the Bush administration, than by any strength shown by the democratic leadership.

The "Democratic majority" is what the right wing might call a "crises of democracy" as more and more people are prepared to rise up and truly vote them out of office. It HAS happened before when FDR took the election. But as the Repugs have been chasing away support, the Dems continue to play "looking for the center" and not giving the voters a real alternative. So this coming democratic majority results with a precipitous dropping of voter turn out. In the 2002 election, we saw that the Dino's had the neo-con reek about them so strong that rank and file Democrats just could no longer hold their nose to vote for a Republican pretender.

One reason why Dean and Dennis K. are doing so well. They are tapping into this vein, the true Democratic movement predicted by this book. The DLC still avoids it, calling it the political third rail, and predicted that Dean would commit political subside with his anti-war stands. Well, Dean touched the third rail, and came back with political super powers. And the campaign season hasn't even gotten started yet.

But something else is also taking place to deny this new majority. Redistricting, and extra-legal redistricting as taking place in Texas and California. These districts are gerrymandered to hell and back, squeezing out the democratic voters. This is one reason why the repugs win their districts by the skin of their teeth. They were DESIGNED like that.

But this Democratic majority can only be stalled. Gerrymander will only work so long before you start seeing land slides. So you call in Dibold. Doubt this, just take a look at Florida. That state is on the vurge of being Democratic territory, and the Repugs know it. So they rig the vote. Both 2000 and 2002 elections were whacked. But the Dems their still aren't giving the voters any viable alternative. Many of the Repug races are not even contested. The DLC has written it off, and the state level keeps making compromises. So the new emerging Democratic majority, will not be realized, so long as the DNC is in charge. It is why I say that the GOP's first line of defense, is the DNC.

[Woodstock]

29. OK, but even the most far right Democrat is better than a Republican

Even Lieberman votes for the things a worker would support if he knew the truth. The only thing Rebpublicans can get us on with the working class is our gun control stance, and if we don't ram it down their throats, that minimizes the impact. Sure there are bigots about gays/minorities out there who salivate like Pavlovian dogs when they hear Rush's rallying cry of "gay marriage" and "affirmative action", but those issues would quickly take a backseat if these same people are aware a Democratic vote means jobs that stay in the US, student loans, clean water and air, civil liberties, healthcare, tax breaks for the MIDDLE CLASS - not the wealthy, ... These are things even right leaning Democrats would vote for, but most Republicans, quite simply, are voting them all down. But ask the Rush/Fox News fans which party is looking out for them, and they quite astoundingly will say the Republican party. Which is actually looking out for one group and one group only - big business (and throwing a bone at the religious right enough to gain their support.) A BRILLIANT con job.

[Code_Name_D]

35. A right wing Democrat and a right wing Republican, are the same thing.

but those issues would quickly take a backseat if these same people are aware a Democratic vote means jobs that stay in the US, student loans, clean water and air, civil liberties, healthcare, tax breaks for the MIDDLE CLASS - not the wealthy, ... These are things even right leaning Democrats would vote for,

How are the Democrats different on these issues? Oh sure they talk the talk, but I am still waiting for Clinton to follow through on a lot of these promises. On each of these things, he failed to deliver.

But these so called "democratic issues" are still minor issues. What about white collar crime staling money from our 401K's? What about Enron manipulating the California electric market? What about the Florida election that we are suppose to just "get over it." And now we have the Diebold scandal as they are rigging the votes across the country. STILL not a peep from the DLC on this. How many investigations did the Dem controlled Senate launches when Jeffords gave them control? News flash, the dems VOTED for that massive Bush tax cut. Even worked hard to help the bill pass by getting amendments into it. They (the DLC) supported and STILL support the Iraq War. They support NAFTA GATT, responsible for your job losses.

At this vary moment, it is with the DLC's power to submit articles of impeachment to the House floor. (It only takes ONE Representative to submit it.) The DLC openly opposes any effort to submit Articles of Impeachment.

Did you know that there are some high ranking Democratic signatures on the PNAC?

I know that some of you have vary high hopes that Clark will kick Bush out of the oval office, then return America to prosperity. But strange that Clinton beat out Herbert Walker Bush, and yet, we are still here, praying for the likes of Clark to win. As the saying goes. Those who fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it.

[Woodstock]

37. OK, you raise important points

The traditional Democratic positions have the backing of a lot of people, but where are the traditional Democratic leaders? Re: your last line, at this point, yes, we are between a rock and a hard place, hence the "Anyone But Bush" rallying cry.

[Classical_Liberal]

36. I am not sure I agree that the most far right dem

is better, particularly as it pertains to Lieberman and Zell. Frankly the emerging Dem majority will never emerge if we must settle for that type.

[Lexingtonian]

26. They are right

They said there would be a majority in the electorate for the sort of thing represented by Democrats.

They didn't say that it would be easy to get, that we would get it by not bothering to have a message, answers, and good candidates, that it wouldn't cost money or sweat or (a little) blood.

They definitely said we wouldn't get it by putting up candidates who fit middle class white prejudices/desires and selfimportance. Dean, or to a lesser degree Clark, are the sort of people they predict would be unable to get that majority coalition together. IMHO, they seem to be getting that right.

According to Ruy-Texeira theory, the states to tip will be those with urban areas that are maybe 50-60% Democratic already, and the states with the highest and growing proportion of blacks and (especially) Latinos. The states to trend the other way are the more rural and white. IOW, we get on the whole stronger in NV, AZ, CO, OR, WA. And weaker in MO (already lost), IA, MN, WI. Florida's behavior fits the theory well...but the lack of effective Democratic energy/effort/money going into it is making it look far less likely than it should. Gore put in a hugh amount of effort at the very end, and Brazile did a lot, but it wasn't quite good enough to make up for what hadn't been done before....

The "problem" you find in the Ruy-Texeira theory is mostly that Democrats have regrouped as social progressives while the Old Democrat social conservatives are dying out or defecting- a spent force. This renewal group is now hitting traditional cultural/economic lines- the Mason-Dixon line and Potomac, the Sierras, the margins of the Great Lakes- which have traditionally been liberal/conservative political boundaries as well- and the political discontinuity at these boundaries just is greater than within each such region. We have about overall 56-57% meaningful hold in California and ~51% holds in Oregon and Washington, but 45%-46% hold in Nevada and Arizona, 48% in New Mexico. This cultural boundary gap-forming 10-12% barrier phenomenon is an unhappy fact of life.

That is why Karl Rove was talking of Florida as "Ground Zero" for '04- it's the most important state where the political/cultural barrier is such that neither side has an adequate edge. Iowa, Wisconsin, Ohio, West Virginia, and Oregon are also such 'border states', and New Hampshire and Maine are also.

[Mairead]

28. I think they were talking about a DLC-led majority, weren't they?

All the Dems in suits, from the dot-com industry?

That was my impression, anyhow.

[markses]

30. Democracy without Guarantees

The lie of trends: They never account for the contingent shifts - the real work of politics. they suppose that they can number crunch, figure, and project without harm. Such and such number of such and such demographic. A starting point, not the finish line. There is no trend. There are only shifts, arguments, positioning.

A whole library of statistics isn't one-third as valuable as Antonio Gramsci's "Prison Notebooks," if you want to understand how populations engage in politics.

[jiacinto]

34. No it wasn't wrong

But change doesn't happen all at once. It happens over time. Remember that the "Emerging Republican Majority" that led to Nixon and Reagan started to gel in the 1952 eletion cycle and didn't cement until the 1972 landslide.