Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil_inKarlate
I didn't read the linked article, but the 'most salient observation' seems spot on. Modern American leftism/liberalism is based on the premise that all people (other than government employees or those properly ordained by the Democratic Party) are either evil, incompetent, or both, and Hillary seems completely comfortable with that outlook. While one can reasonably argue that the walk didn't always match the talk, Reagan's rhetoric was (IIRC) universally about empowerment, promoting the idea that most people are good and/or capable.
Stated policies, platforms, and other promises certainly do count towards electability, but I'd think whether or not a candidate has any respect for you (assuming you're one of the masses rather than some sort of associate) would have some appreciable bearing, given the track record of political promises...
|
Reagan talked the talk but his social conservative views often led to contradictions, plus his spending habit was the opposite of Old School Republicanism. Right wingers like to make such claims against the left wingers about people being viewed as evil and needing Big Brother. And surprise surprise, they say the same things about the right in turn. IMO, as someone who holds many classical liberal views, I find neither are true and that many people in the modern Dem and Rep parties are either for or against personal freedom and for more or less government depending in the issue. For example, many on the left call for Big Brother on the Second Amendment whilst many on the right call for Big Brother on the First and Fourth Amendment. As for government spending and size, it's now chutzpah for the current GOP to say anything in that regard given its huge Big Brother/Big Spender track record. What matters to me is each person's platform about what they wish to do and undo. How one partisan wishes to self-servingly and conveniently characterise themselves as opposed to others attempts to shut down that analysis for their own benefit and without regard to the real truths at issue.