Memo to liberals: You're outnumbered (It's the country, not the system, that's stacked against libs)

MSNBC ^ | 07/22/2010 | From NBC's Mark Murray

[SeekAndFind]

As the liberal blogosphere confab, Netroots Nation, kicks off today in Las Vegas, it will inevitably further the "Why are progressives disappointed in Obama?" storyline.

In the past few months, liberal commentators have bemoaned that the public option wasn’t included in the health care law, that the financial reform legislation -- which President Obama signed into law yesterday -- isn’t strong enough, and that Gitmo still isn't closed. The Nation's Eric Alterman even penned a widely discussed essay explaining these disappointments on a system that's stacked against progressives.

But here is something to consider: It's the country -- not the system -- that's stacked against liberals and progressives.

From 1989 (after Reagan's presidency) to now, the most stable data in the NBC/WSJ poll has been that roughly one-fifth of the country identifies as being liberal, while one-third identifies being conservative. Even in 2008, when Obama decisively won the presidency, the average in the poll was 25% liberal, 36% conservative. And in 1996, when Bill Clinton easily won re-election, it was 22% liberal, 34% conservative.

For Democrats, this means that if they want to win national elections, they need to win about 60% of the self-described moderate vote -- which Obama did in '08 and congressional Dems did in '06, per the exit polls. By comparison, however, John Kerry got 54% of the moderate vote in 2004.

So the bigger question for Democrats and liberals shouldn't be: "Why isn't Obama's presidency more progressive?" Instead, it should be: "Why isn't the country more progressive?"

[jpl]

It's the country, not the system, that's stacked against libs

That's completely true. The problem of course is that the system now controls the country, and not the other way around, and they control the system.

[La Lydia]

Unfortunately, they do control most of government, the media, the universities, the public schools, most charitable foundations and the mainline protestant churches. All of those institutions will need to be taken back before the “progressives,” who are liberals and socialists living under an assumed name, can be truly “disappointed.”

[John O]

Unfortunately, they do control most of government, the media, the universities, the public schools, most charitable foundations and the mainline protestant churches. All of those institutions will need to be taken back before the “progressives,” who are liberals and socialists living under an assumed name, can be truly “disappointed.”

And the way to do that is to start living like conservatives. We have to stop being nice and worrying about whether they like us or not. We have to stop being politically correct and start speaking the truth

Liberals will never like us. They are the enemy of everything that is good about America. They are the enemy as much as teh terrorists are the enemy. Infact, liberals are even worse because they are harder to defend against.

[Kharis13]

I haven’t seen any solid statistics on this, but I would think conservatives would surely begin to outnumber liberals, simply because conservatives usually have bigger families. I’m not saying that liberals don’t love children, but there does seem to be an awful lot of hand-wringing by libs when they talk about having kids: “The world is a bad place!”, “What if they’re picked on?”, “We can give more love to one child than three” etc. I think most conservatives look at it fairly simply; children are a blessing.

Just a thought.

[Uncle Ike]

” It’s the country — not the system — that’s stacked against liberals and progressives. “

And that’s the source of the Liberals’ cognitive dissonance - they believe with religious fervor that “the System is there to control the Country (ie. ‘the People’)...

Now that they actually control the System, they’re getting smacked in the nose with the rolled-up newspaper of reality - us “we-the-people” just ain’t gonna stand for it....

[La Lydia]

But, as you probably noticed, instead of breeding their own the liberals keep bringing in replacements from other countries and giving them amnesty. The needier, more ignorant, more dysfunctional and more easily led, the better.

[DarthVader]

“Unfortunately, they do control most of government”

For now but November is coming soon and conservatives also have more guns than liberals do. The end of the road is coming for them. General Order 24 commences after November 2nd 2010.

[little jeremiah]

LIberals are by definition pro-abortion; that’s not exactly loving children.

I’ve seen a liberal come up to a total stranger, a mother with about 6 or 7 children, obviously home schooled (during school hours) and verbally attack her for having so many children.

I’ve also heard other like comments, many times, from liberals, just not in the mother’s face.

Liberal do not love children. They may have affection for their own (the ones that survive the gauntlet) but in general they cannot be said to love children.

[SeekAndFind]

but there does seem to be an awful lot of hand-wringing by libs when they talk about having kids

The obvious question is this -- which ideology supports the TERMINATING of a child's life in the mother's womb ( even up to near the time of birth ) ? If the philosophy is --- we can have sex anytime we want and if the girl gets pregnant, we can always abort, I don't think this bodes well for the liberal future.

[La Lydia]

One can only hope. But there is also the entire executive branch still controlled by blatant marxists (and pervs); state governments all over the country are run by and for the libs, and many local governments as well.

[popdonnelly]

The “progressives” don’t care if they are outnumbered. In their minds, they are morally and intellectually correct, so we’re just supposed to go along with them.

[MIchaelTArchangel]

To My Liberal “Friends”:

If you want to live in a liberal country, try France. I hear one-way airfare to Paris is pretty inexpensive.

Michael

[dbrew2u]

At this point, it really doesn’t matter one way or the other. Their in charge and it is they that are destroying the Country 2000 + Pages at a time. Obama has managed to get passed everything he wanted to this point.So why argue semantics ?

[VRW Conspirator]

Liberals will never like us. They are the enemy of everything that is good about America.

I am convinced that when an emerging liberal finds out that his views are largely unpopular, he turns to personal activism. Like the passage of Obamacare, the Libs knew it was unpopular and unwanted, yet they shoved it down the pike in one spiteful thrust. I am still reeling over Nancy Pelosi's claim, "We have to pass it to find out what is in it". She knew it was full of crap, but went with it anyhow.

[bassmaner]

If you want to live in a liberal country, try France. I hear one-way airfare to Paris is pretty inexpensive.

The Frenchie French may not be quite 'liberal' enough for our lefty bleeding hearts ... they just banned Islamo-nutcase women from wearing burkas in public. They get 80% of their electricity from nuclear power, and they're not even afraid to reprocess the waste!

France ain't looking too bad these days ...

[infowarrior]

To My Liberal “Friends”:

If you want to live in a liberal country, try France. I hear one-way airfare to Paris is pretty inexpensive.

Michael

The crux of the problem, Mike, is what it's always been. They keep trying their darndest to bring France here (at a minimum, the more radical want to bring the Soviet Union here). What has kept them from succeeding thus far, is the fact that we're Americans, not French, which is a major reason they wish to keep importing large numbers of non-Americans here, to dilute our success...

the infowarrior

[TopQuark]

>I>"From 1989 (after Reagan's presidency) to now, the most stable data in the NBC/WSJ poll has been that roughly one fifth of the country identifies as being liberal, while one third identifies being conservative. Even in 2008, when Obama decisively won the presidency, the average in the poll was 25% liberal, 36% conservative. And in 1996, when Bill Clinton easily won re-election, it was 22% liberal, 34% conservative. "

That's the disease of bean-counters who look at the data and cannot see the forest for the trees. Yes, the number of people who identify themselves as liberal is stable, but the meaning of "liberal" has changed. Both Carter and Kennedy proudly referred to themselves as Democrats, but what do they have in common? Not much.

While the proportions of ideological social strata remained constant, the entire country moved left. If you lift a book from the table, the first page is still the first and the last is still the last; the first one third of the pages is still one third. But the entire book is now higher than the table. You can't determine where the book is by looking at the relative position of its pages.

Similarly, you can't determine where the country is by looking at the quoted data --- no matter what those data show. P.S. Since when are we supposed to use a hyphen in "one third" or "one fifth?"