The Daily Beast's Michael Tomasky addresses one of the more fascinating post-election prospects--that the GOP might go on some efficacious meds--but he does it in such a hysterical way, one is tempted to recommend deep meditation or at least a stiff drink for Tomasky himself. For instance he ridicules, as "completely delusional," President Obama's rather modest "hope and ... expectation," in his own words, that "after the election ... we can start getting some cooperation again."
Tomasky says no way. Simply no way. Maybe in 20 years, he writes; but any hope or expectation of GOP moderation anytime soon is just nuts.
He then, however, plants the seed of his own argument's destruction:
Republicans behave the way they behave because every incentive they have rewards it. They are loony-right obstructionists because it pays to be that in terms of contributions and votes.
Exactly. Which, translated into immediate electoral terms, means a decisive GOP thumping this November--with the cycle repeated, if necessary, in 2014--would grab the attention of a lot of swing-district and purple-state Republican pols. Their incentive would have changed.
I'm not predicting that outcome, which, although a long shot, is nonetheless possible. I'm only saying that when Tomasky and others say with gloomy confidence that the change "[will] take 20 years," in reality it could, quite literally, occur overnight.
Or economic contractions, black swans, the stenographic media, and Citizens United could conspire to run the federal table for the GOP, in which case the overnight transformation would be the dismantling -- nay, the wholesale chainsawing -- of every social/environmental/workplace protection put in place since FDR. The ideologues would have four years to machete their way through it all before an aghast electorate (assuming said AE were still enfranchised by then) could throw the bums out and try to put the pieces back together.
Why, yes. Yes, I am a little ray of sunshine this morning.
Posted by: Janicket | June 07, 2012 at 10:11 AM
Janicket, hopefully we won't have to see if your assumption needs to come into play. I think history shows that once a group like the current Republican Party takes total control of a government, they do everything in their power to make sure that the people have no ability to remove them from said control.
Boy, am I the cloud trying to block out your ray of sunshine? Sorry about that.
Posted by: japa21 | June 07, 2012 at 10:41 AM
Heh. Yes, aren't we just positively Panglossian on this lovely morning?
Posted by: Janicket | June 07, 2012 at 11:33 AM
Or, couldn't a President Rubber Stamp Romney with a republican house and senate run everything into the ground effectively, spin all of the destruction (once again) into being the fault of liberals? What's to stop them from continuing with that old cannard? It's been working for them ever since Nixon. He's the one they should be worshipping, not Reagan.
Posted by: AnneJ | June 07, 2012 at 12:18 PM
Currently, Obama is a 2-1 favorite to win reelection. the economy is already on track for a major rebound over the next four years. (Remember the steady recovery of the past three years has been in spite of a terrible housing market that is just now beginning to rebound.)
So by 2016, the electorate's memory of the previous 24 years will be two successful Democrat administrations and one terribly failed GOP administration. If you were 20 when that period began, you will be 44 when it ends - and barely remember Reagan.
Obama and the Dems will be the moderate, centrist, conservative, successul party. The GOp will be even more radical by 2016 - whcih somewhat contradicts the details of PM's prognosis.
By 2020 or 2024, the southern states of VA, NC, MO and FL could be well be blue states, with GA, TX and AZ as swing states trending blue. This would be about 60 years after the civil rights acts.
SC, KY, TN, MS, AR, LA and OK will still hold out for Sherman's March to the Sea even then.
Guys, imagine this race if unemployment was 6.5% and Obama was 100% white intead of 50%. i'm guessing he nets another 5 percentage points.
Posted by: Robert Lipscomb | June 07, 2012 at 01:43 PM
Robert, another good post that I don't disagree with, but please: it's Democratic administrations, not "Democrat administrations." Yes, Presidents Clinton and Obama are Democrats. This means they belong to the Democratic Party. There is no Democrat Party, any more than there's a Republic Party.
Republicans (and more recently their media arms) have been using that construction as far back as the 1950's as a pejorative. This may seem like nitpicking, but I think the semiotics in this are important.
Posted by: Tom D. | June 07, 2012 at 03:16 PM
@TomD: Thanks. For the life of me, I cannot keep these words straight. But I will try.
Posted by: Robert Lipscomb | June 08, 2012 at 10:01 AM