tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post7467743032859477985..comments2023-10-16T07:13:12.123-05:00Comments on A plain blog about politics: Cranky Wednesday Blogging 4Jonathan Bernsteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15931039630306253241noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-79466973999946615552011-12-28T23:06:45.050-06:002011-12-28T23:06:45.050-06:00Whether or not Congress is actually functioning, p...Whether or not Congress is actually functioning, people perceive it to not be functioning. (poll numbers bear out the decline in trust in all political institutions, above and beyond the usual sport of Congress-bashing). It's not good for democracy if people think democracy isn't working--even if people's preferences are being aggregated accurately and they're really just whining about the results.wkdeweyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10868091938156254671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-62283177645064151882011-12-28T20:05:12.497-06:002011-12-28T20:05:12.497-06:00Another good point is that “moderates” can be unco...Another good point is that “moderates” can be uncompromising ideologues in their own right. Just take Hiz Honor in NYC. This guy is supposedly the archetype of the moderate and compromising politician that Washington is lacking but when faced with the problem of some college kids protesting the massive investment banks that destroyed the world economy he responses with outrage, bluster and searing criticism (occupy people weren’t just un-American, the were hurting middle class workers in New York somehow as well according to Mayor of America’s largest city.) There’s nothing about a policy preference that makes it uncompromising, it’s the method of politics in the public arena that produces gridlock and dysfunction. After all, the President took a very “middle of the road” approach to deficit reduction with the so called “grand bargain” and what happened? The GOP vetoed it. <br /><br />Paul Wellstone and Ralph Nader were both pretty liberal guys with somewhat similar policy preferences, but the each took diametrically opposite approaches to politics. A more "moderate" Nader would not be a better legislator than the current one and a more "moderate" and headstrong Wellstone probably would have been a worse one.longwalkdownlyndalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13173899547449318257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-26953212326108172192011-12-28T19:44:21.983-06:002011-12-28T19:44:21.983-06:00Calhoun had a thing or two to say on some other is...Calhoun had a thing or two to say on some other issues, too...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-5302665263739834532011-12-28T18:52:27.868-06:002011-12-28T18:52:27.868-06:00Legislation ought to be hard to pass. Calhoun had ...Legislation ought to be hard to pass. Calhoun had a thing or two to say on this issue. If you believe that the way to solve problems is to steamroller the minority, then sure, the 111th Congress was "productive" and the 1940s through the 1960s was a failure. But if the idea is to form "cross-aisle coalitions" - you know, like the article says! - then not so much. You may note that huge progress was made on civil rights in the 1940s and 1950s, that no-one dreams of undoing. There is a difference between minorities blocking legislation (fantastic) and all government coming to a standstill (disaster). The former, but not the latter, was the story of the earlier period. The latter is the story of today.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com