my thoughts on the state of American politics

[freepcrusher]

does anyone here see that most elections aren't racially polarized as much as they are a war between two different types of white people?

The democratic percentage of the white vote has declined in the past few decades but this masks the fact that there are a lot more "hard" democratic whites that simply didn't exist 50 years ago. In my opinion, even in 1964, most of the current democrats would be lucky to get 30 or 35 percent of the white vote.

Likewise, in congress, even though there are less democrats then there used to be; overall there are probably more "hard" democrats now. 50 years ago you had only a dozen or two hard left democrats with guys like Bob Kastenmeier, Don Edwards, Ed Roybal etc. Now, probably half the democratic caucus is of that ideological bent.

An article from the American Conservative in 2008 illustrates how their was never really any postwar liberal consensus and that liberalism as we know it really didn't begin until after Kennedy was assassinated:

To their surprise, however, as the radicals rushed forward with their battering rams, the liberals opened the gates and surrendered. How could they resist? If America had killed Kennedy, then liberalism was merely a smiley face painted on a System of racist and sexist oppression. Liberals could best atone for their participation in such a charade by supporting the revolution in all its exotic incoherence. For a decade or so after November 1963, liberalism and its institutions were convulsed by disputes, entering the maelstrom as pragmatic, patriotic, and problem-solving bodies and emerging from it as perfectionist, utopian, anti-American ones, secretly anxious to punish the American majority for its sins rather than solve its problems.

[CountryRoads]

does anyone here see that most elections aren't racially polarized as much as they are a war between two different types of white people?

The democratic percentage of the white vote has declined in the past few decades but this masks the fact that there are a lot more "hard" democratic whites that simply didn't exist 50 years ago. In my opinion, even in 1964, most of the current democrats would be lucky to get 30 or 35 percent of the white vote.

Likewise, in congress, even though there are less democrats then there used to be; overall there are probably more "hard" democrats now. 50 years ago you had only a dozen or two hard left democrats with guys like Bob Kastenmeier, Don Edwards, Ed Roybal etc. Now, probably half the democratic caucus is of that ideological bent.

An article from the American Conservative in 2008 illustrates how their was never really any postwar liberal consensus and that liberalism as we know it really didn't begin until after Kennedy was assassinated:

To their surprise, however, as the radicals rushed forward with their battering rams, the liberals opened the gates and surrendered. How could they resist? If America had killed Kennedy, then liberalism was merely a smiley face painted on a System of racist and sexist oppression. Liberals could best atone for their participation in such a charade by supporting the revolution in all its exotic incoherence. For a decade or so after November 1963, liberalism and its institutions were convulsed by disputes, entering the maelstrom as pragmatic, patriotic, and problem-solving bodies and emerging from it as perfectionist, utopian, anti-American ones, secretly anxious to punish the American majority for its sins rather than solve its problems.

uh....maybe in the south (most likely less actually), but not in the north.