Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Why I Admire the Democratic Party
I will stipulate that the policies of the Democrat Party are both fiscally irresponsible and socially destructive. I will stipulate that Democrats lie to advance their destructive and irresponsible policies. I will stipulate that Democrat politicians are by and large corrupt, irresponsible, and often display a disturbing hostility toward Constitutional rights.
Having said that, there are things one cannot help but admire, even envy, about the Democrat Party versus the Republican Party.
1. Democrat Leaders Don’t Attack Their Own Members.
In the Republican Party, merely wanting fiscal responsibility is enough to get you labeled a “whacko bird” or one of “the crazies” by the party’s own leadership. There is no Democrat equivalent to Congressman Peter King or Senators Lindsey McCain and John Graham, advancing themselves by constantly attacking parts of their own coalition. And it’s not as though the Democrat Party doesn’t have crazy people attached to it: Maxine Waters, Sheila Jackson Lee, Code Pink, Fortney “Pete” Stark, #BlackLivesMatter, and Baghdad Jim McDermott, to name a few. But when have you heard them attacked by other members of their party, much less the leadership? The Democrats follow the Republicans 11th Commandment better than Republicans do.
2. Once Elected, Democrats Deliver for the People Who Elected Them.
The Democrat Party has one basic value proposition: “Vote for us and we’ll take money away from other people and buy you things with it.” It’s what their voters want, and when elected, they deliver. What do Republicans promise their voters? “We’re going to cut spending and get the Government off your backs.” Yet, spending is never cut, and the bureaucracy continuously grows. In fact, there has not been a major piece of conservative legislation passed since the 1996 Welfare Reform Act. In fact, it often appears that the GOP leadership spends the bulk of its time in office trying to figure out how to sell out the people who elected them and make deals with the Democrats. And on that note…
3. Democrats Always Win “Bipartisan Compromises”
Hypothetically, liberal Democrats always want to increase spending, and conservative Republicans always want to cut it. So how is it that every “compromise” ends up increasing spending, just not as much as Democrats want? Instead of decreasing, just not by as much as conservatives would like? The much-hated sequester didn’t really cut spending, just the rate of growth. Baseline budgeting is suggested year after year, but never comes anywhere near being implemented.
And consider the grand “Bipartisan Compromise” of the Gang of Eight Immigration Bill. Democrats pretty much got everything they wanted; a path to citizenship for a constituency that votes 70-80 percent Democrat and higher levels of future immigration for that constituency. What did conservatives get? A bunch of border security promises and some fines for illegal immigrants, all subject to the waivers and whims of the Democrat president.
4. Democrats Never Give Up On Their Policies, Even When They’re Unpopular
When Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi took over the Congress in 2007, they didn’t just wring their hands and say, “Gee, we would really like to push the agenda our constituents elected us for, but we just don’t have the votes.” No, they went to work advancing the left’s agenda. Even if they didn’t get the payoff right away, they began laying the groundwork. Democrats pushed for state run health care for years before winning Obamacare. Democrats pushed gay marriage for years, even when it was unpopular. Even when they didn’t openly support it, they didn’t try and alienate those who did. Democrats still support partial birth abortion and gun control, even though they are massively unpopular. They aren’t easily cowed into abandoning their priorities by harsh word or a legislative setback.
5. Democrats Don’t Act Like They Are Embarrassed by Their Own Base.
One reason it’s so demoralizing to be part of the conservative base is that even when you win an election, you still feel like you’re losing the agenda. The Tea Party helped deliver the Congress to Republicans in 2010 and 2014, and what thanks do they get? The party leadership seems embarrassed by them and only too happy to deride them as “radical extremists” just as the Democrat Party and the media do. The Democrat coalition, on the other hand, includes environmental extremists, radical feminists, reconquistas, socialist revolutionaries, and a menagerie of fringe leftists. Whatever Democrats may think privately about their fringe, you never hear them trashing any constituency openly.
It is a shame that the Democrat Party, with policies so destructive, actually manages itself in a way that guarantees the advancement of those policies. The Republicans either have no grasp of how the game is played, or have no real interest in advancing a more conservative set of policies. Maybe both.
Published in Politics
That election seemed to turn on Bill Clinton and 47%.
Roberts is considered a victory? How many more victories can the republic withstand?
The 2005 and 06 budgets contributed to a 2.37% decrease in one fiscal year 5 years later. That is some work.
I am happy to infuriate you since again you devolve to sensationalism absent facts.
Jamie, you have a lot of passion and make some good points, but you would make them better if you wound your watch a little before hitting the Post Comment button. You aren’t going to earn much respect or friends calling people infuriating strains because they disagree with you. You have no shortage of opinions, but refuse to do any research and love insulting people, especially me, with your moderate talking points.
Reagan reformed and flattened the tax code and it has only gotten more progressive since.
You aren’t infuriating because you disagree with me. I’d bet dollars to donuts that we probably agree on 90% of things. It is infuriating because blanket statements are thrown out like “There have been no conservative victories” or “Only the Democrats win” and then ignore blatant and obvious evidence to the contrary because it isn’t quite as good as you would like.
Yes the tax code is more progressive now than in 1986, but it is demonstrably flatter, less onerous and with substantially lower marginal rates from a historical perspective. Furthermore, any attempt to raise taxes over about 35% for top earners is met with massive pushback from the majority of the public.
This is a substantial conservative victory. Is it perfect? No. But it is miles further than we were in 1980.
I utterly reject the notion that because we don’t have a flat tax we have no conservative victories on taxation.
It is a conservative principle because it is unquestionably superior to protectionism. Even Trump’s classy, luxurious, moderate protectionism.
Roberts replaced Rehnquist. He is unquestionably vastly superior to Rehnquist. In fact, he has been stellar on nearly every topic aside from Obamacare.
He was a serious upgrade. Before Roberts and Alito, Kennedy was the third most conservative Justice on the court.
Bush’s tax cuts were minuscule, temporary and offered no real tax code reform. Roberts saved Obamacare. The Iraq War Resolution was passed on a bipartisan basis. Obama and Clinton also got Free Trade Agreements. The decline of unions had zero to do with conservative legislation being passed. The Republicans cancelled the border fence in 2007. E-Verify is not mandated and obviously isn’t working. The Real ID Act was bipartisan and advanced no conservative goals. The Lawful Commerce in Firearms Act, I’ll concede. And The Surge was a military endeavor, not a legislative policy achievement.
Boehner and McConnel managed to make them permanent.
Why does it matter how something was passed and by whom as long as it is a conservative policy?
Was Welfare Reform not a conservative policy goal because Clinton signed it?
John Roberts also voted to overturn Arizona’s Border Enforcement Law.
As for “apart from saving Obamacare, he has been stellar,” that’s like saying, “Aside from the unfortunate incident in the balcony, Our American Cousin was an excellent performance.”
My point is that neither of these incidents advanced any conservative goals. Any Congress would have passed either of them. Big whoop.
Certain John Boehner helping Obama pass a 2,000 page trade agreement that was hidden from the public was not consistent with the ideals of open government and participatory democracy. As has been widely pointed out, Free Trade does not require secret agreements running 2,000 pages long.
You really cannot acknowledge what an incredible upgrade he has been? This thread is about how the left is effective about pushing their agenda, while the right is not.
We have shown concrete ways that the right has advanced their cause, and you dismiss them outright as not counting, because there are other areas where things haven’t gone our way.
Free Trade is a major conservative goal. For evidence read: every free market economist ever.
“But what about this missing link over here…”
Frank you would’ve been an upgrade over Rehnquist, and a vast improvement over Roberts and I sincerely do not mean that to degrade you.
A Republican appointed judge is, in the short run at least, an upgrade over a progressive judge. If we concede Roberts other cases, the damage he has done via ACA rulings have lasting negative effects.
Agree and until anyone at Ricochet has read and noted the draft of TPP and other agreements there is no credibility to argue fast-tracking TPP has anything to do with free trade.
False.
FY2014 Budget: $3.77 Trillion
FY2015 Budget: $3.90 Trillion
FY1026 Budget: $3.97 Trillion (requested)
Source OMB.
Fair enough, but would that make fast-tracking a conservative victory if it does?
The itty-bitty things you cite, some of which like “the budget is being cut” aren’t even accurate, do not compare at all to the massive advances the progressive left is making, often with Republican cooperation.
And that’s just in the last five years.
Is there anything ‘conservative’ about passing massive bills whose contents are kept secret from the public?
Has that happened? The TPP has yet to be finalized or voted on.
Those are requests, much of which wasn’t approved or spent. Treasury details the actual outlays.
TPA was voted for in just that manner. TPA is the enabling legislation for TPP.
Why is there any confidence at all that a Republican Party that consistently sides with large corporate special interests over the priorities of voters will reject a TPP even if it is as bad as all indications say it is?
Admittedly, it’s clever of the GOP to at least stand their ground a little bit on gun control; but this whole “You better cut us some slack on Amnesty and Crony Capitalism because Democrats will take your guns” is repugnant.
I have seen no indications that the TPP will be bad. Can you please point me to the articles arguing as such?
Don’t you know how to use Google?
You’re the one making the assertions, I request that you support them.
Here is the treasury data to date.
Never ever let the time it takes to do a sliver of research get in the way of arm waving and sensational insults.
It’s gonna be great!
Some assertions about TPP, TISA, etc. here.