?

Log in

No account? Create an account
 
 
05 February 2014 @ 06:34 am
A Choice, Not an Echo  
The first election I really noticed was 1952, when I was ten years old. The two candidates, Dwight D. Eisenhower and Adlai Stevenson, were different, but not too different. (If you wanted "too different," there were other parties on the ballot--Prohibitionist, Vegetarian, a couple of flavors of Socialist--but most people didn't want "too different.")

Given my age, it would be understandable if I imprinted on that and thought it was the normal way for elections to be, just as I consider it normal for the Yankees to win the World Series every year. I didn't, but a lot of the media did.

One way in which things were different back then was that the losers didn't hold their breath and turn blue and refuse to let the winners do anything unless they got a supermajority. By now, the parties are too different for the 1952 model.

And The New York Times can't face that. So they tried to find a reasonable Republican; as Lenny Bruce would say, one who doesn't wet the bed. Unfortunately for them, they chose Chris Christie. At this point, he is probably beyond rehabilitation, so they now have to find another Republican who is not as obviously crazy as the Republican base wants. Lotsa luck, guys.

ETA: Come to think of it, in the 50s there was a group that held its breath and turned blue and refused to let the winners do anything, but that included members of both parties and was only about segregation. Now it's just the Republicans, and it's about everything.
Tags:
 
 
 
matrixmannmatrixmann on February 5th, 2014 02:45 pm (UTC)
Sometimes it would be interesting to see how American politics would get along with a European multi-party system. If they'd go on with fighting as they did over the past years. (To admit, after elections it's not better than that in Europe if it's about finding a cooperate to gain majority.)
Young Geoffreyed_rex on February 6th, 2014 05:10 am (UTC)
They haunt us (you) still
Come to think of it, in the 50s there was a group that held its breath and turned blue and refused to let the winners do anything, but that included members of both parties and was only about segregation.

I suspect that your Republicans — your Tea Partiers and Kock Brothers stooges, your racist-by-"accident" Libertarians — are in fact descendants of those two-party bigots from the 50s. It took them a long time and a lot of hard work, but especially after Nixon, they consolidated in the back-rooms of the Republican Party and have been working on a slow-motion coup of your Republic ever since.

And they have succeeded to a terrifying degree. On most economic and political liberty issues, you could make a strong case that Barack Obama is to the right of Richard Nixon. Far to the right.