Sunday, May 9, 2010
Moving Right, Moving Left
In Utah, Senator Bennett (R) lost his seat in the Republican caucus. Representative Matheson (D) has been forced into a primary race, his first. Bennett lost his seat because he was not conservative enough, though he has a very conservative voting record. Matheson may survive, but his troubles stem from his vote against the health care reform bill, which has be a litmus test of sorts for liberals. Could all of this mean that the Right is moving right and the Left if moving left? It appears to me that the left and right are demanding ideological purity. How this trend will play out in the next several years is impossible predict, but my sense is that it will be more advantageous for Conservatives, but I admit to a bit of cheer-leading in stating this opinion.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
It is my understanding that Bennett will run a write-in campaign, I don't know if that it is true. If so, it would give the average Utah Republican (most are moderate I believe) a real choice rather than to choose between two that are further right than the electorate.
As for Matheson, he will win the primary handily. I do not know about the general. Claudia Wright (White?) is an out lesbian, she cannot be elected in that district or in any district for that matter in Utah. I have met her, she is nice, I could not judge her competency, but her personality did not impress.
It is not good that both parties veer to their extremes. More polarization. Great, just what we need.
I agree that more polarization is not in the best interest of anyone but with that said, I would hate to see conservatives move more left. It is a catch twenty-two for me.
I see the Tea Party as a new commer that even though it may be far right definately sticks to its guns (nothing violent meant by that) and convictions. I can't say I am a Tea Partiest but I admire their resolve.
Many on the left incessantly make fun of the Tea Partiers. But I don't really have a problem. Similar crowds on the left hold ridiculously stupid signs, embarrassing really.
The thing about anger, which I think is what is driving them more than anything else even more than principles (I'n NOT saying that they don't have principles or that principles aren't part of it), is that anger is not sustainable over time. I believe I know this because I have watched similar movements on the left within the GLBT community fizzle with time. Queer Nation and ACT-UP were very productive during their brief existences, but just could not last.
Lack of real and stable organization was part of their demise as well, which is a problem the Tea Party has.
Post a Comment