I'm reminded of Joe Pesci's line in Casino where he says "It was the last time that street guys like us would ever be trusted with anything that f'ing valuable". So it is for the Democrats.
They seemed doomed after Carter, but were resuccitated when Bush Sr. behaved like a Democrat, Ross Perot bifurcated the electorate, and Bill Clinton sneaked into office. Because of the peace dividend from the recently ended Cold War, a gold rush of technology spending, and a sharp turn to the right after the 1994 Republican Congressional takeover, he even got reelected. Unless there is another perfect storm of good fortune for the Democrats they will not be trusted with anything this valuable for a long long time.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I would undoubtedly agree Americans are displeased with Democrats now, but I'd attribute it more to a natural election cycle than a fatalistic theory.
ReplyDeleteI subscribe to the general theory that in our two-party system, the parties rise and fall almost naturally. The Democrats enact reform like they did under LBJ, Americans are unhappy (whether it is directly as a result of the actions) and elect Republicans. The same thing happens to the Republicans, which puts a Democrat in office.
If you look at the twentieth century, this cycle is apparent. Republicans had the first decade, then it was Wilson, then it went back to Harding/Coolidge/Hoover, FDR/Truman, and so on. The ups and downs are natural. The Democrats will eventually be in the minority, and they will eventually rise again. And I honestly believe the fluctuations in American politics can only be seen in that way.
On another note, I heard you're MIT-bound. That's awesome. Congratulations!
Bill, thanks. I agree that there is definitely a natural cycle and that to a large extent, what we are seeing now is the proper functioning of the system.
ReplyDeleteThanks re. MIT. I'm heading there for orientation on Sunday! Will miss Seattle but will be a great adventure I'm sure.