tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4853315445082809509.post7678431416451360701..comments2023-05-26T09:45:51.853+02:00Comments on Random Walk: The New StepinfetchitsDWBuddhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12955276932812880108noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4853315445082809509.post-27349820514747440022013-04-10T20:02:10.439+02:002013-04-10T20:02:10.439+02:00Yes, and quite right.
Up to a point.
I agree th...Yes, and quite right. <br /><br />Up to a point.<br /><br />I agree that many people see issues like same-sex marriage or gun control not as bread and butter issues, but instead, as moral questions. Especially younger voters. For them, of course, the moral imperative can and will over-ride a more <i>realpolitik</i> view.<br /><br />That having been said, I would offer the following.<br /><br />First, the actual difference in policy between the Democrats and the Republicans on, say, same-sex marriage is not nearly as wide a gulf as the media would have you believe. What was the functional difference in 2008 between McCain and Obama on this issue? Mr Obama was *VERY* late to the party on this, with his waffling equanimity about how he "evolved" to his position with the (IMHO) risible argument that his 12 year old daughter convinced him.<br /><br />The other is, a lot of the differences are driven not by fact, but rather, on packaging. There is a narrative here (and people like Dunham and others are being used, willingly to drive it), that the Democrats are the "hip" party who are a natural fit for younger voters due to inflated differences on wedge social issues. And I continue to see the "War on Women" as a totally phony, manufactured issue. We probably disagree, but I just fail to see how forcing an elite legal university to provide "free" birth control pills to a 30 year old student is somehow an attempt to put chains on millions of middle-class women.<br /><br />In the end, you're right that the GoP will need to moderate some of their social policies. I think that as we speak, same-sex marriage is losing its talismanic powers as more Republicans (Ohio's Rob Portman most recently, but also Laura Bush and even the Devil Himself - Dick Cheney) come out, so to speak.<br />DWBuddhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12955276932812880108noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4853315445082809509.post-51358521121041528682013-04-10T17:18:13.168+02:002013-04-10T17:18:13.168+02:00I think this is an interesting perspective. The c...I think this is an interesting perspective. The critical question is asked in the VDH article--essentially, what is the proper tradeoff between voting for one's economic interests and voting for one's sense of right and wrong (same-sex marriage, the environment, gun control, etc.). Many young people are perhaps ignoring economics, but when you have a political party that is directly inimical to your sense of right and wrong, it may be that there is no looking past that. In point of fact, there are many people who are for both less government spending and also a more tolerant and less beholden-to-religion culture. The two party system is forcing a false choice given the way the two parties fall on social and economic issues. It is hard to see the Democrats changing their ways on economics. Sooner or later, I believe the Republican Party will wake up to the reality they face and stop alienating a large portion of the electorate with their social policies.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com