Econlib Resources
Subscribe to EconLog
XML (Full articles)RDF (Excerpts) Feedburner (One-click subscriptions) Subscribe by author
Bryan CaplanDavid Henderson Arnold Kling More
FAQ
(Instructions and more options)
|
|
||||||||
|
|
Blogging software: Powered by Movable Type 4.2.1.
Pictures courtesy of the authors. All opinions expressed on EconLog reflect those of the author or individual commenters, and do not necessarily represent the views or positions of the Library of Economics and Liberty (Econlib) website or its owner, Liberty Fund, Inc.
The cuneiform inscription in the Liberty Fund logo is the
earliest-known written appearance of the word
"freedom" (amagi), or "liberty." It
is taken from a clay document written about 2300 B.C. in the Sumerian city-state of Lagash.
|
||||||||
You should write a book on this topic of "competitive government". I don't know of anything else written along similar lines.
"greater reluctance of Republicans to talk to pollsters"
I think you mean greater reluctance of Democrats to talk to pollsters for it to be consistent with the results.
Why do you think someone with an unfavorable view of both parties would like a moderate?
Much of the polls can be explained by moderates like me who have a negative view of both parties because both parties are controlled by extremists. If a single party is in control, then its extremists are in control. But, when power is divided, each extremist wing is returned to a minority.
If 80% of each party is an extremist, but the extremes cancel each other out, then you always have a 60-40 majority to block extremism (the 20% of nonextremes in each party, plus the opposing extremes).
Supermajority voting rules also accomplish this. But the use of reconciliation and the success of the Senate Dems in mustering 60 votes on HCR overcame that. So now we see the electorate groping toward a different kind of supermajority structure.
In any case, if the Republicans (and the Tea Party) actually meant anything they claim to stand for, then they've just been handed the golden opportunity to body-slam the Democrats.
The Republicans control the House now. For the next two years, no bill should come out of the House that have "and ObamaCare et al is hereby rescinded". The majority are still opposed to it.
Let Obama and the Dem controlled Senate spend two years, repeatedly jamming this unpopular piece of crap down the nation's throat. The Dems will either have to yield to the demand of popular pressure, or they'll take yet another blood bath in the 2012 elections.
This is the very best opportunity the Republicans could have hoped for to insure the unseating of Obama in 2012. It's a golden opportunity.
This same tactic could be repeated for any and all other unpopular legislation in recent history.
The Republicans, of course, will not do this. Because they don't know what they really mean or what they stand for anymore. They were getting light footed during Clinton. They completely lost any connection to principles during the Bush II era.
I think Arnold is right to believe that Republicans as we've known them are on their death bed. The Republican party will somehow survive, as some sort of "thing". But it will become something different from what it's been. I'd say odds are that it will move to the left when all is said and done.
Because, those on the left know what they want and they're willing to fight for it. Their opponents do not know what they want or what they're fighting for. And this has been the sad story of all socialist successes (especially including communism flavors) for about the last century.
A cautious moderate would be a nice change, though. Return to normalcy 'n all.