Friday, October 24, 2008

The Many Phases Of A Conservative Blog This Election

The tone on my "favorite" conservative blog that is lately a borderline asylum where I like to go to argue with right-wingers, has gone through several phases over the last several months. This is similar to a comment I posted there today, and thought it was interesting enough to be posted and expanded on a little here. The phases have been as follows:

1. In the primaries, Rightwingsparkle is all for McCain. Most other commenters are against McCain and want a more jowly, disagreeable arch-conservative type like Fred Thompson, or a slick fiscal conservative like Romney, or a religious rightie like Huckabee. Rightwingsparkle is *correct* that McCain was the only Republican with much of a chance this cycle, but many commenters don't want to hear it.

2. After McCain wins the primary, Rightwingsparkle tries to convince everyone to vote for him even though he wasn't far right enough for many people here. Some of her commenters make her look like a centrist, and that's very, very difficult.

3. Palin is picked, and everyone goes wild. McCain jumps in the polls at first and everyone loves her. Rightwingsparkle goes through the roof with McCain/Palin love and donates up to the max of $2,300 to his campaign that day. (Hopefully that paid for some of Palin's $150,000 "populist" wardrobe.)

4. Palin gets a little exposure. Whoops, put her back on the talking points quick! The dreaded mainstream media is blamed for her inability to put two coherent sentences together. How dare they ask what newspapers she reads!

5. Economic crisis hits, McCain parachutes into DC, says he won't debate, but then does anyway. Obama gains traction and wins debates according to debate viewers. Rightwingsparkle and her commenters blame the media, SNL, moderators, Democrats, Hollywood, and sunspots, but never McCain himself or his performance for any of this. What ever happened to the "party of personal responsibility"?

6. McCain campaign announces they're going negative on character issues in the middle of a financial crisis. Her blog follows suit the same day. All we hear about is Ayers, Acorn, and Wright for weeks. Everyone forgets what McCain's platform actually is. People eventually get tired of the attacks. This is reflected in the polls. Rightwingsparkle and her commenters blame the media. Again. Who else's fault could it be that people think the attacks are way over the top, right?

7. Today we have 11 days to go. Now it's all about generalized fear. Today Obama is supposedly a power-hungry egomaniac that will let everyone get nukes. Yesterday his supporters were tearing up the country, attacking McCain supporters and shooting up people's houses. (Well well, that was a hoax by a McCain supporter, as I had suspected!) Tomorrow she'll probably say that Obama will be collecting your guns. Once you call a guy a socialist and friend to terrorists, almost everything seems like fair game, doesn't it? The Republicans have finally and completely lost their compass. Help them go through their period of introspection that they so desperately need to find it again. Vote Obama.

10 comments:

Rightwingsnarkle said...

The Republicans have finally and completely lost their compass. Help them go through their period of introspection that they so desperately need to find it again.

1. Wingnuts don't do introspection.
2. When your opponent is drowning, toss 'em an anvil, preferably one attached to a very heavy chain.

This isn't about making nice. This is about taking back a country.

Anonymous said...

I really don't know why I go to that blog.I guess to see what the other side is thinking. I too have seen the tone change and the attitude get more and more offensive to discourse.
There are some commenters there that are just ugly in their assaults on anybodywho doesn't toe the McCain line (and frankly so is the blogger) I show up there less and less often because of thecomplete disconnect from reality happening there. About the only things of which they haven't accused Democrats, Obama-supporters, and thinking people of all races and religions is baby eating and public urination.
'He's going to take your guns''Muslim terrorist' 'Elitist, America-hating snob' Etc. And they feed of each others comments. If (I hope when) Obama is elected I really wonder how the resistance these and others just like them, getting their ideas and information from each other and talk-hate radio, can be overcome.

Erik Grow said...

Snark, I never said how long I thought they should be forced inward. *;-) How does 50 years sound? Heh. We need to close this deal first. Ten more days. They are already doing a fine job of tearing each other up.

Anonymous (M?), yeah it's getting worse and worse. If Obama is able to do half the things he wants to do and if things get reasonably better, he'll be able to overcome it. What's great about coming in when things are terrible is that the normal bounce can be something you take some credit for, like Reagan.

Anonymous said...

Erik,

I've brought this up before om RWS blog, but you still haven't really explained it well beyond a Hope. As a supposed moderate left guy, why wouldn't you want a relatively center-right McCain as president to counter what will surely be a very left Democratic Congress in the next two years? It seems to me that would be a perfect situation to put some moderate center-left policies through without going too far left.

I know McCain has gone a little right this election (as is always the case), but his history has consistently shown he's willing to work with the other party. Again, when exactly has Mr 97% Always Voted the Democrat Line demonstrated he's willing to accept compromise?

Blake

michilines said...

Hey Erik,

Kathleen, (aka sparkle) doesn't like it when I post this link on her blogs, but you should see it. Back when McCain was at his lowest ebb, Kathleen was leaning towards Thompson -- she had given up on McCain. Don't believe any of the bullshit she says about always being for McCain. She wasn't.

(And no, that anon wasn't me.)

We -- two friends and I -- voted today for Obama right here in the red state of Texas. Harris county is looking good and the Dallas area as well as San Antonio may move us to at least having a real Senator come January.

Obama/Biden '08!

Erik Grow said...

Michilines, I greatly admire your optimism, but neither the presidential nor senate races are going to fall our way in TX. I've been watching the numbers closely. However, making it as close as possible is ALWAYS good, so that's great that you got to vote already! I checked out the comment. Wow, that's funny that it looked like she might go for Fred at one point! I know she certainly was for Johnny way back when but didn't know she had ever abandoned him. Fred was awful. He was about my least favorite of all of the R field this time. Huckabee was bad too and was/is a total nut, but at least he was a likeable nut.

Blake, I am a moderate Democrat. That doesn't mean I am dead center of the road overall. Within the Democratic party I'm probably considered center-right but I would not consider myself "Blue Dog". I want to see the party be as big a tent as is reasonably possible. As for wanting McCain to win to "balance out" a Democratic congress...

Ummm... To put it mildly... No. If Republicans think they can put us through eight years of this and then get elected again...wow. Why would you even want to validate it in ANY way, much less give them another try? Talk about battered wife syndrome. Just give me one more chance to make it right... no, no, NO.

I already said however that I don't think filibuster-proof is a good idea right now because I think they need to ease into things and if Obama wins by a decent margin, Republicans aren't going to block everything anyway. If things do improve and it looks like we have a handle on the economy, then sure maybe we can expand the margin a little. What I don't want is 1994. I want us to stay focused on what is important and not get "fat and happy" like Republicans did before 2006.

I have some views that are in the leftish side of the party, some in the rightish side of my party, and some that would be considered more moderate Republican views. I have a long time ago on some issues, and will again perhaps go into all of the views that I have on issues. Make no mistake though, I will never EVER be a Republican, short of a total seismic shift in ideals of the two parties as they stand now. Many of my problems with the party are outlined here: http://erikgrow.blogspot.com/2008/05/why-i-cant-be-republican.html

Not to congratulate myself really, as I never saw the current situation coming to THIS extent, but read reason 2A carefully. Sound relevant to today's situation?

Boorish said...

From what I've read of RWS, your characterization here is not unreasonable. Where you miss the mark (IMO) is in not understanding the objections of the conservative base. The major areas where McCain has angered the base - amnesty for illegal aliens and McCain-Feingold, are not "wingnut" issues, they're areas where most Americans of both parties disagreed with him. Certainly with illegal immigration, significant majorities of both Democrats and Republicans want stronger enforcement of immigration law. And Obama was all for public financing of campaigns until he discovered that it was in his personal interest to abandon those old tired principles.

And govt regulation cuts both ways. Democrats want more regulation of the airwaves to enforce their interpretion of 'fairness'. I don't see how anyone can pretend to have an honest discussion on govt regulation without acknowledging the perverse incentives these regulations often create. For example, under the recent bailout plan, banks are being strongarmed by the govt under the guise of regulation, to loan money to other banks who would otherwise not have received those loans. Don't like it? Daddy govt will yank funding and consider revoking your bank charter. And so on.

Erik Grow said...

Yes, I do understand where McCain has angered the conservative base, but with selecting Palin I think that ceased to be his problem. The negative campaigning really bit him hard.

As for the "fairness doctrine", I don't support it, and many other Democrats don't either. That is definitely a subset of the party that wants that.

As for the bailout, I have misgivings, some of them what you outlined, but both parties voted for it. We'll see how it goes.

Boorish said...

Since you oppose the fairness doctrine, can you at least acknowledge that the fairness doctrine was legislation deregulated by Ronald Reagan? You seem not to be aware of that fact.

Since your stated opposition to deregulation is one of your pillars of opposition to the Republican party, I would hope an honest open minded individual might reassess that position. My point is that deregulation, per se, is not nearly as bad as what you have claimed it to be. Just sayin'.

Erik Grow said...

I wasn't aware that it was the same law that some Dems are trying to pass now Boorish. My position on regulation is not uniform to everything. There can be too much or too little. That kind of deregulation is about speech, while business deregulation affects the economy. I consider those to be very different areas of life.