Today's Newest Democrats

Coalitions are torn down and reformed when an element in the existing coalition crosses over for some reason.

In the 1960s, the divide happened on social issues. Veterans of WWII and the New Deal era were appalled by the social licentiousness that came from young folks dropping out of a society which was using them as cannon fodder in a war 10,000 miles away. Kennedy Democrats became Nixon Republicans, then Reagan Republicans, and they raised their children to think in the same way.

This thought pattern is now baked-in to our political debate. Many are unaware of it. The rest are unable to change it.

That's why we have political crises. Assumptions become ossified, and an entire generation must be forced, by events, to look at life anew and change their minds.

In the 1930s, the divided was philosophical. Veterans of WWI were appalled at the callousness of Republican leaders, who felt a policy of noblesse oblige and private action would solve what came to be known as the Great Depression. (Remember that the 1927 Louisiana flood was dealt with by private action, under Herbert Hoover, who then rose from Secretary of Commerce to the White House.) Without knowing exactly what they were for – just do something – these people abandoned the Republican Party for a lifetime, and taught their children to feel the same way.

See the pattern? It has returned, this time on economic issues.

Wall Street is slowly moving left.

The issue is, in a word, inflation. The Bush policy of buggering the dollar and exporting inflation is striking increased numbers of conservatives as crazy. Former conservatives like the blogger Tim Iacono are switching sides. Worldwide inflation promotes instability. As Stirling Newberry notes, Iran is paying less for more military might today than ever before, thanks entirely to Bush Administration policies.

This uneasiness filters down. The comic to the left is Prickly City, brought onto my paper's comic page some months ago to offer a conservative counterpoint to comics like Doonesbury. It's written by Scott Stantis of the Birmingham News.

But a curious thing has happened since this comic entered my paper. While there are still lame jokes attacking Howard Dean and Hillary Clinton, most of the commentary has become bitter, towards the Bush Administration, toward its conservative enablers, toward neo-conservatives, toward conservatives in general. (As seen here.)

It's symbolic of a general de-coupling in the American public. There is an enormous sense of denial  in the media and the government over what is happening, just as there was 40 years ago before Republicans swept toward (but not to) power.

But this de-coupling is happening. It may have already happened.

Fact is the generic ballot's evidence is backed by empirical evidence, from conservative columnists questioning their premises, from lifelong Republicans saying they will vote Democratic, and from fundraising. Given a fairly-run election, the question is not whether Democrats will win but what they will do with that win.

If they are smart they will heed the wishes of their new troops, emphasizing the need to fight commodity inflation, to balance the federal budget, and to help shareholders. Ironically, this is just what Howard Dean's 2004 campaign promised. That's why I first compared him to Barry Goldwater.

Comments

[Jesse Kopelman]

This is exactly why I think if Dean had been given the Democratic nomination, he would have easily beaten Bush in 2004.