New poll has Mass. Senate race in a dead heat

[OttoVonBismarck]

Of course, the moderation he's espoused hasn't gotten him anywhere, has it?

Well, he went up in my books when he didn't do any of the stupid things the hard core left wanted him to do in Iraq/Afghanistan.  By and large he's earned some respect from me on those fronts.  The bailout was horrific, but I'm not sure any bailout wouldn't have been.  That doesn't take him off the hook for it, but I don't rake him over the coals for it, either.

The problem is that only a very small number of people saw Obama as a moderate during the campaign.  I think the hardcore left just drank Obama the person up, they thought he was like them.  They genuinely thought he was a MoveOn guy putting up a vaguely moderate front to get elected.  They were just waiting with baited breath for his swearing in, when he'd fly in on his golden-plated pegasus and save America from the troubling right-wing path it had been on for so many years.

The truth of the matter is that Obama was a moderate.  The problem is, only moderates really thought he was one.  Sure, a few conservatives realized Obama was a moderate (myself included in this), and a few of the hard core leftists did, as well.  However, most of the really conservative types thought Obama was a lunatic lefty, most of the lunatic left thought Obama was one of them.

The fact that he's behaved as a moderate means nothing to most conservatives, hard core right-wing Republicans don't give a shit how moderate Obama is by and large--he's still a democrat.  The fringe left are pissed that he's moderate.  The actual center of the country is just pissed that he's been inept.

So no, his being a moderate hasn't done much for him.

[grumbler]

You may someday convince us to replace "Liberal" with "Leftist", but good luck getting the rest of the country to change

"Liberal" in common parlance means leftist, at least in the US.  Hence the need to clarify adding "Lockean" or "Classical" if you are referring to the "old" type of Liberalism.

You (and others) use "liberal" like the DDR used "Democratic."  Good luck getting anyone with brains and knowledge to agree with you.

I accept that "Liberal Democrats" are self-defined and are what a knowledgeable poster would call "leftists;" what i have always wondered is why anyone but them goes along with that misnomer.

[Razgovory]

Since they have not invented another word to replace Liberalism I demand it keep its original definition.

This ain't France.  We don't have some hidebound Academy that pontificates on the correct meaning and usage of words.

And if we did, I'd suspect that they wouldn't make you a member, or care much about what you demand.

We however have dictionaries.  When people develop wildly different meanings for words it only serves to confuse discourse.

[Sheilbh]

I think the people on the left who are disappointed in Obama are the ones who didn't pay enough attention and got caught up in the symbolism of it all.  As I argued then, if you read his statements and the rest, he isn't a liberal.  Now, having said that, he's probably the most liberal president since LBJ but I think that's more an indication of how much political discourse moved to the right in those decades than anything else.  In short I agree with OvB.

And, as I said during the election Iraq, at this point, doesn't matter.  The SOFA which outlines American withdrawal and sets dates was signed by Bush, once that happened there was effectively no difference between any of the candidates - except, maybe, for Kucinich and Gravel.

From what I've read Brown deserved this and he could be an interesting Senator, though of his policy ideas I'm not impressed.

[derspiess]

You (and others) use "liberal" like the DDR used "Democratic." 

I don't believe I do.  Feel free to prove me wrong, however.

[derspiess]

Who is a RINO then?

There is no true RINO when you're out of power but you can find many of them while in power. 

I generally dislike using that term to begin with, but if pressed I would say maybe Olympia Snowe (despite being named one of the "Top 100 Conservatives" by the Telegraph).  Lincoln Chafee would be the very definition of a RINO-- that is, before he decided to leave the party altogether.

[grumbler]

You (and others) use "liberal" like the DDR used "Democratic." 

I don't believe I do.  Feel free to prove me wrong, however.

The Liberal Party exists to build a Liberal Society in which every citizen shall possess liberty, property and security and none shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity. Its chief care is for the rights and opportunities of the individual, and in all spheres it sets freedom first.

http://www.liberal.org.uk/

What does the Liberal Party stand for?

We are the party of initiative and enterprise;

We believe in the inalienable rights and freedoms of all peoples; and we work towards a lean government that minimises interference in our daily lives; and maximises individual and private sector initiative.

We believe in government that nurtures and encourages its citizens through incentive, rather than putting limits on people through the punishing disincentives of burdensome taxes and the stifling structures of Labor's corporate state and bureaucratic red tape.

We believe in those most basic freedoms of parliamentary democracy - the freedom of thought, worship, speech and association.

We believe in a just and humane society in which the importance of the family and the role of law and justice is maintained.

We believe in equal opportunity for all Australians; and the encouragement and facilitation of wealth so that all may enjoy the highest possible standards of living, health, education and social justice.

We believe that, wherever possible, government should not compete with an efficient private sector; and that businesses and individuals - not government - are the true creators of wealth and employment.

We believe in preserving Australia's natural beauty and the environment for future generations.

We believe that our nation has a constructive role to play in maintaining world peace and democracy through alliance with other free nations.

http://www.liberal.org.au/about/ourbeliefs.php

The Liberal Party of Canada is committed to the view that the dignity of each individual man and woman is the cardinal principle of democratic society and the primary purpose of all political organization and activity in such a society.

The Liberal Party of Canada is dedicated to the principles that have historically sustained the Party: individual freedom, responsibility and human dignity in the framework of a just society,and political freedom in the framework of meaningful participation by all persons.

... the Liberal Party of Canada subscribes to the fundamental rights and freedoms of persons under the rule of law and commits itself to the protection of these
essential values and their constant adaptation to the changing needs of modern Canadian society.

http://www.liberal.ca/pdf/docs/lpc-2009-constitution-en.pdf

These positions, from real liberal parties, don't correspond to much in the modern US Democratic Party (and, in fact, are in opposition to many of them).   The use of the term "Liberal" in the US contradicts its use elsewhere in the world, and especially where they have liberal parties.  I will go with those who have enough faith in their understanding of the term that they will use it for their party name.

[Barrister]

These positions, from real liberal parties, don't correspond to much in the modern US Democratic Party (and, in fact, are in opposition to many of them).   The use of the term "Liberal" in the US contradicts its use elsewhere in the world, and especially where they have liberal parties.  I will go with those who have enough faith in their understanding of the term that they will use it for their party name.

I have no horse in the "what does the word Liberal mean" race, however I think your comment that the positions of the various Liberal parties are in opposition to the US Democratic Party.  First I don't think the Democratic Party would ever argue that they are opposed to individual liberty and would agree with the statements of principle that you have quoted.  Second, at least with respect to the Liberal Party of Canada, they identify very publicly as identifying themselves as similar to the US Democratic Party, and generally advocate for policy roughly similar to what the Democratic Party does.

[Fate]

Who is a RINO then?

There is no true RINO when you're out of power but you can find many of them while in power. 

I generally dislike using that term to begin with, but if pressed I would say maybe Olympia Snowe (despite being named one of the "Top 100 Conservatives" by the Telegraph).  Lincoln Chafee would be the very definition of a RINO-- that is, before he decided to leave the party altogether.

Based on voting records and position stances Brown is slightly to the left of Snowe and to the right of Ben Nelson. Granted, this record was accumulated as a member of the most liberal Republican state party in the nation, so it's totally possible that he may tack hard to the right. Although he is running for reelection in a mere three years with Obama on the ballot.

[Sheilbh]

I have no horse in the "what does the word Liberal mean" race, however I think your comment that the positions of the various Liberal parties are in opposition to the US Democratic Party.  First I don't think the Democratic Party would ever argue that they are opposed to individual liberty and would agree with the statements of principle that you have quoted.  Second, at least with respect to the Liberal Party of Canada, they identify very publicly as identifying themselves as similar to the US Democratic Party, and generally advocate for policy roughly similar to what the Democratic Party does.

I'd add that I don't think the Democrats work as an ideological party.  How would you define the Democrats' governing ideology?  I don't think they have one unlike, say, the Republicans, Labour, the Gaullists.  The Democrats seem to me far more like an old-fashioned coalition of interests.  They've core issues rather than core beliefs.

[derspiess]

Grumbler-- I'm confused as to how all that confirms that I "use 'liberal' like the DDR used 'Democratic.' "  Can you tell me where I have done that so much?

I was merely pointing out that Valmy (and apparently you) might as well adjust to how the term is used in the US.  If you want to hold yourself & everyone else to a predominately foreign usage of the word, go ahead, but you might as well start speaking the Queen's English since, you know, we should defer to the people who use that for their country's name.

In any case, I don't typically use the word "liberal" by itself, given the confusion that can go either way.  I usually say "leftist" when referring to those left of the political center and "Lockean Liberal" or "Classical Liberal" when referring to the type of "Liberal" our friend Valmy pretends to be

Btw, odd that you use both the Canadian and Australian Liberal parties as examples, given how the Canadian Liberals tend toward the left & Aussie Liberals are the right

[derspiess]

Based on voting records and position stances Brown is slightly to the left of Snowe and to the right of Ben Nelson. Granted, this record was accumulated as a member of the most liberal Republican state party in the nation, so it's totally possible that he may tack hard to the right. Although he is running for reelection in a mere three years with Obama on the ballot.

I think comparing voting records on the state level (Brown) & national level (Snowe) is a bit dodgy.  I'm going by what Brown's more recent stances have been, and to me that puts him to the right of Snowe.  I don't think he would have voted the way Snowe did to move the Democrat health care bill along, for example.

[Fate]

The new face the family values party.

[Sheilbh]

Hey, maybe the President shouldn't be talking about cutting the deficit and instead asking what happened to the trillions of dollars in tax cuts and war spending under Dubya. Maybe, if the "right-wingers discredit themselves" by subscribing to an "intellectually bankrupt ideology", you shouldn't make noises about bipartisanship and then seem like a tool when nobody wants to make huggy faces at you.

I don't think blaming Bush won't work any more.  Even if there's truth to it it comes across as sour grapes.  Also I think it's a very good thing for Obama that twice the number of people think he's doing 'enough' to be bipartisan than think Republicans in Congress are (I believe Obama's around 50% and the Republicans are at about 25-30%) even if it doesn't lead to any great bipartisan bill. 

Incidentally I do think that this whole deficit reduction thing is somewhat implausible.  The truth is that to cut the deficit the US needs to have some combination of tax rises, military spending cuts, medicare cuts and social security cuts.  I can't see how any of them are going to happen any time soon because they'd all be far too unpopular and far too easy to attack.  At the minute it seems to me like the US is basically trying to have a mildly social democratic system, with a big (and expensive) military and rather low taxes (especially personal taxes).  Something has to give.

[Darth Wagtaros]

All the comments I'm hearing from Democrats in Mass (or ex pat Massholes) indicate outrage over "their" seat being taken.  Ridiculous.  Some even say Coakley was a suck candiate and ran a suck campaign and are pissed off anyway.