TONIGHT - Moyers talks to Kevin Phillips about a new permanent political alignment under Obama.

[Dover]

PBS - check local listings for time.


Does Barack Obama's victory mean a new and permanent political alignment in American politics? Bill Moyers speaks with former Nixon White House strategist Kevin Phillips about how America has changed since Phillips penned THE EMERGING REPUBLICAN MAJORITY 40 years ago. (also author of Bad Money about which Moyers recently interviewed him).


Also on the program, Bill Moyers sits down with Columbia University professor Eric Foner, who specializes in political and African-American history, and University of Wisconsin history professor William P. Jones, who specializes in 20th Century America, to discuss the historical implications of electing Barack Obama.


And, Bill Moyers reflects on the election of Barack Obama.

[ixion]

1. we're talking about a cyclical process... not a static one

there is no such thing as "permanent" in this context.

[DireStrike]

2. Thank you.

Using that word in the context of politics makes you look dumb. Unless you're one of them there Illuminati.

[Dover]

3. True nothing is static. However, what seems to be emerging is something akin to

a one party system...united...which could indicate a long term restructuring of the party system if not a permanent one. I'm not sure that is what is being suggested here, but that IS being suggested by Obama's apparent color blindness when it comes to party lines. A good thing, or dangerous to democracy?

[ixion]

5. decreasing diversity of opinion is never a good thing

and in this context, united parties are bad. I would actually prefer to see representation from all parties and a wide array of opinion.

[Dover]

6. We have become so diversified already that I'm not sure there is such a thing as

a majority anymore. The umbrella for our two party system has to increasingly grow in order to
'contain' this growing diversity. And consensus is nearly impossible to achieve. So terms like left, right and middle or even Democrat/Republican or 'democracy' are becoming increasingly difficult to define. But that doesn't stop people from trying...based on their own narrow agendas.

And how can 'majority rule' accomodate diversity?
Democrats here on DU witness these differences among us, and have been ridiculed for being so divergent and/or inclusive on a vareity of opinions that we are not, as a group, effective. But the alternative is a kind of Totalitarianism and lock-step approach which stifles and oppresses diversity which is like cutting off the blood supply of a country which causes stagnation and eventually death....spiritually, economically, socially, etc.

We might be able to agree on broad ideas, but their implementation requires a much more nuanced process.

I think our government should be designed to accomadate and respond to diversity. Right now it's more like using a blunt instrument to do intricate surgery. Perhaps we should require all those in government to have skills in conflict resolution and mediation.

For instance, the gay marriage issue. People in California were given the option of voting yes or no, but we don't know what the basis of their decision was. So an entire group (minority or not) was
disenfrancised in a single stroke without really getting at the nuanced issues behind it.
Perhaps if Californians who voted were asked to rate how important the issue was to them personally, or what their primary objection/agreement was, or what their fear was, or what part of that issue is negotiable...or ANYTHING besides a simple yes or no answer, it might have contributed to a healthy dialogue that those in the gay community could speak to. As it is, they simply had the door slammed in their face. That is not an effective way to run a country and does not recognize the value of diversity or how best to use that diversity as a strength. Perhaps a mediator could arrange for various groups to come together for discussions like that. The gay community with the church community for instance. I think a gifted mediator could not only enable negotiation on differences but also help to reveal similarities and common goals as well so that both groups felt empowered.


At any rate, I welcome changes to our current system so that it is more inclusive. In some ways, because diversity is the natural state of things, it seems inevitable that our institutions will EVENTUALLY be required to reflect that universal truth. But if we begin to consciously tackle that
issue it might happen sooner rather than later.

[Cleita]

4. Moyers is a must watch for me every Friday night.

K&R

[Dover]

8. For me too!...n/t

[malaise]

7. Thanks

I'll be watching

[Dover]

9. A "Permanent" Progressive Party?

Well the Dems have a long way to go to embody Progressive principles, imo.

Democrats talk of a ‘permanent progressive majority’
Source: Politico


Echoing Karl Rove's words from four years ago, Democratic pollsters on Friday touted the creation of a “permanent progressive majority.”

“This was not just a change election, but a sea-change election,” Robert Borosage, co-director of the Campaign for America’s Future, said during remarks at the National Press Club. “This is the end of the conservative era.”

“What you’re seeing in the nation is the emergence of a center-left majority,” Borosage continued. “We are witnessing the creation of a permanent progressive majority.”

Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg agreed, saying that the United States is now “in a progressive period.”


Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15407.html


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3589176

[malaise]

10. Kick n/t

[malaise]

11. Kevin Phillips up now n/t

[Uncle Joe]

12. Thanks for the heads up, Dover.

:thumbsup:

[dhpgetsit]

13. It was an interesting program.

He is always interesting.

Here is a link to this blog where they discuss the coalition that powered Obama to victory and how it could fall apart.

What do you think?

Will the Democrats' electoral coalition prove durable over the next several election cycles?

Over the next few decades, do you expect Democratic and Republican party platforms to change significantly from those of today?

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/blog/2008/11/tracking_americas_shifting_pol.html