Debate Now Is Liberalism Exhausted?

[Foxfyre]

Yes.

While I really do admire succinctness, prerhaps a bit of elaboration on that?

 

[Foxfyre]

Okay I'll wade in and offer the first post in the new Structured Debate zone.

In his column today Jonah Goldberg proposes a thesis that liberalism as it is defined and practiced in modern day America has worn itself out. It's proponents in the media have lost their luster and are no longer able to gain much if any traction in popular appeal. The 2014 election suggested people are looking for something different. President Obama has been able to move his party far to the left, but has been unable to attract recruits to join them.

The article: Is Liberalism Exhausted RealClearPolitics

Rules for this debate:
:
1. No ad hominem. Address the member's post and make no comment on the character or motive or intent of the member himself or herself.

2. No mention of Republicans or Democrats or any other political party. Keep the focus on liberalism and whether it has or has not run its course in America.

3. Please keep criticism of specific media, political, or other personalities to a minimum.

THE QUESTION TO BE ANSWERED:

Is liberalism exhausted, i.e. has it run its course in America and will fade into the background in coming years?

Your link from RealClearPolitics is full of ad hominem and criticism of specific media outlets.

Please be specific. The link does use MSNBC as an illustration to support the point made, but I didn't see any specific criticism of it. Could you give me an example of ad hominem from the article because I definitely did miss that.

Really, you don't?

Nope. So please post the specific quotation that would show that criticism and the specific quotation that would be classified ad hominem.

 

[Mac1958]

The axis of indoctrination (academia, media, Hollywood) has achieved its goal. We are going to see liberalism on steroids in the future.

.

No, not at all.

I think we've passed the tipping point, and we're on our way towards what the Left wants, some version of a Euro-social democracy.

What I don't (can't) know is whether it will end up looking more like Germany, France or Greece.

The de facto collapse of our southern border will ultimately be the last straw, as the Left will able to flood the electorate with those who are much more inclined to support such a system, a far more powerful, centralized federal government presiding over a populace heavily divided into the various identity groups.

That's been the goal all along.

It is what it is.

.

LOL. You guys aren't giving me a great deal of hope here. I read an article like Goldberg's today and think maybe there is hope. Maybe the American people are less sheeplike than I've given them credit for. Maybe they are able to figure out some things for themselves and the worm really is turning.

He is right that leftwing (aka liberal) media has a really dismal track record. Despite massive funding, Air America couldn't make it. MSNBC has a tiny fraction of the audience of Fox News who continues to out pull all the other cable news networks combined in ratings. NPR and PBS are less partisan than most others, but they are accused of being at least somewhat left of center. I have been reading where they are struggling financially, though I'm not sure that is due to loss of audience. Both are completely funded of course and don't have to make it on popularity. But why is their funding falling behind?

And it seems that fewer people are willing to identify themselves as 'liberal'.

So in all due respect, while I fear you might be right, I hope you are wrong.

I think it's a terribly wasted opportunity, and I don't think it's the spirit of our Constitution, but it's certainly an easier sell than personal responsibility and self discipline.

.

I'm not following that too well Mac. Can you elaborate or explain what you mean here?

Yeah, maybe that was a little cryptic, huh?



First, I think that our Constitution gave this country a real chance to stay as prosperous as we were for a much longer time, and that it provides a person their best chance to really stretch out and find out how far they can reach. Even better, we all benefit from it. That's pretty cool, and obviously there are many who see too many flaws in that. These people have been successful, then, in convincing enough other people that they were victims of this approach, and that's that. Once a person has that mentality, I don't know how it's turned around.

Y'know, for me, the tipping point was the reaction to "you didn't build that, someone else made it happen". When I saw how many people completely bought into that, in my opinion, we had crossed the line.

Second, telling someone that they're a victim, that someone is out to get them, that they deserve better, and that we'll make life fair for you is a significantly easier sell than "you can do it, don't depend on others, earn what you have, it's up to you". It just is. Individual responsibility and its positive effects lasted a long time, but it has decayed with time, obviously helped by those above. And again, I don't know how you turn that around.

As I said, it is what it is.

.

 

[Foxfyre]

The axis of indoctrination (academia, media, Hollywood) has achieved its goal. We are going to see liberalism on steroids in the future.

.

No, not at all.

I think we've passed the tipping point, and we're on our way towards what the Left wants, some version of a Euro-social democracy.

What I don't (can't) know is whether it will end up looking more like Germany, France or Greece.

The de facto collapse of our southern border will ultimately be the last straw, as the Left will able to flood the electorate with those who are much more inclined to support such a system, a far more powerful, centralized federal government presiding over a populace heavily divided into the various identity groups.

That's been the goal all along.

It is what it is.

.

LOL. You guys aren't giving me a great deal of hope here. I read an article like Goldberg's today and think maybe there is hope. Maybe the American people are less sheeplike than I've given them credit for. Maybe they are able to figure out some things for themselves and the worm really is turning.

He is right that leftwing (aka liberal) media has a really dismal track record. Despite massive funding, Air America couldn't make it. MSNBC has a tiny fraction of the audience of Fox News who continues to out pull all the other cable news networks combined in ratings. NPR and PBS are less partisan than most others, but they are accused of being at least somewhat left of center. I have been reading where they are struggling financially, though I'm not sure that is due to loss of audience. Both are completely funded of course and don't have to make it on popularity. But why is their funding falling behind?

And it seems that fewer people are willing to identify themselves as 'liberal'.

So in all due respect, while I fear you might be right, I hope you are wrong.

I think it's a terribly wasted opportunity, and I don't think it's the spirit of our Constitution, but it's certainly an easier sell than personal responsibility and self discipline.

.

I'm not following that too well Mac. Can you elaborate or explain what you mean here?

What is 'liberalism'- other than anything other than what you agree with?

You can't debate something without agreeing what that something is.

Goldberg assumed his audience would understand what was meant by liberalsim in modern day America. I assumed the same things from participants on this thread.

Liberalism in modern day America is referred to at different times as 'statism, progressivism, leftism, political class.' I doubt that there iare many following politics these days that does not know what liberalism in modern day America is. I would really like for the thread not to get bogged down in a battle over semantics. Let's just go with the flow, okay unless somebody offers a description of liberalism that doesn't fit what liberalism is.

 

[Foxfyre]

The axis of indoctrination (academia, media, Hollywood) has achieved its goal. We are going to see liberalism on steroids in the future.

.

No, not at all.

I think we've passed the tipping point, and we're on our way towards what the Left wants, some version of a Euro-social democracy.

What I don't (can't) know is whether it will end up looking more like Germany, France or Greece.

The de facto collapse of our southern border will ultimately be the last straw, as the Left will able to flood the electorate with those who are much more inclined to support such a system, a far more powerful, centralized federal government presiding over a populace heavily divided into the various identity groups.

That's been the goal all along.

It is what it is.

.

LOL. You guys aren't giving me a great deal of hope here. I read an article like Goldberg's today and think maybe there is hope. Maybe the American people are less sheeplike than I've given them credit for. Maybe they are able to figure out some things for themselves and the worm really is turning.

He is right that leftwing (aka liberal) media has a really dismal track record. Despite massive funding, Air America couldn't make it. MSNBC has a tiny fraction of the audience of Fox News who continues to out pull all the other cable news networks combined in ratings. NPR and PBS are less partisan than most others, but they are accused of being at least somewhat left of center. I have been reading where they are struggling financially, though I'm not sure that is due to loss of audience. Both are completely funded of course and don't have to make it on popularity. But why is their funding falling behind?

And it seems that fewer people are willing to identify themselves as 'liberal'.

So in all due respect, while I fear you might be right, I hope you are wrong.

I think it's a terribly wasted opportunity, and I don't think it's the spirit of our Constitution, but it's certainly an easier sell than personal responsibility and self discipline.

.

I'm not following that too well Mac. Can you elaborate or explain what you mean here?

Yeah, maybe that was a little cryptic, huh?



First, I think that our Constitution gave this country a real chance to stay as prosperous as we were for a much longer time, and that it provides a person their best chance to really stretch out and find out how far they can reach. Even better, we all benefit from it. That's pretty cool, and obviously there are many who see too many flaws in that. These people have been successful, then, in convincing enough other people that they were victims of this approach, and that's that. Once a person has that mentality, I don't know how it's turned around.

Y'know, for me, the tipping point was the reaction to "you didn't build that, someone else made it happen". When I saw how many people completely bought into that, in my opinion, we had crossed the line.

Second, telling someone that they're a victim, that someone is out to get them, that they deserve better, and that we'll make life fair for you is a significantly easier sell than "you can do it, don't depend on others, earn what you have, it's up to you". It just is. Individual responsibility and its positive effects lasted a long time, but it has decayed with time, obviously helped by those above. And again, I don't know how you turn that around.

As I said, it is what it is.

.

We'll probably need to start culling out some of the stacked quotes here soon, but thank you for this. Very well written and right on point.

I was exactly where you are. I think that huge concept of liberalism has been a snowball gaining mass and momentum since the T.R. Roosevelt Administration and, like you, I thought we had passed the point of no return to stop it before it flattened and consumed everything in America.

But I'll admit that Goldberg's article this morning got my attention and got me thinking. Leftwing media continues to struggle and isn't gaining momentum or relevance. The 2014 election put the less liberal people into the most power they have held since 1952 (according to Goldberg.) And we are seeing the marginal, emotional issues pushed to the forefront and issues such as jobs, taxes, the economy, failed welfare programs, etc. etc. set aside.

I took from his article that we may have been underestimating the ability of the American people to see and understand what is happening even if some are a lot slower to do that than others. And I want to believe he is right that liberalism may be exhausted under its own weight and the worm might be turning.

 

[emilynghiem]

Okay I'll wade in and offer the first post in the new Structured Debate zone.

In his column today Jonah Goldberg proposes a thesis that liberalism as it is defined and practiced in modern day America has worn itself out. It's proponents in the media have lost their luster and are no longer able to gain much if any traction in popular appeal. The 2014 election suggested people are looking for something different. President Obama has been able to move his party far to the left, but has been unable to attract recruits to join them.

The article: Is Liberalism Exhausted RealClearPolitics

Rules for this debate:
:
1. No ad hominem. Address the member's post and make no comment on the character or motive or intent of the member himself or herself.

2. No mention of Republicans or Democrats or any other political party. Keep the focus on liberalism and whether it has or has not run its course in America.

3. Please keep criticism of specific media, political, or other personalities to a minimum.

THE QUESTION TO BE ANSWERED:

Is liberalism exhausted, i.e. has it run its course in America and will fade into the background in coming years?

Because I foresee the social legislation in liberalism pushed to the people and states to transfer off the plate of federal govt, I believe the liberal parties will take on this role of managing these programs, so that the formal govt can return to its intended structure, process, and checks and balances under the Constitution. Liberalism will fulfill its promises but as its own network of democratically elected hierarchy, similar to how parties, media and academic institutions operate outside govt.

 

[Mac1958]

I took from his article that the worm is that we are underestimating the ability of the American people to see and understand what is happening even if some are a lot slower to do that than others. And I want to believe he is right that liberalism may be exhausted under its own weight and the worm might be turning.

Yeah, I really don't know. Fact is, I actually agree with moderate Democrats more than I do with Republicans on a majority of the issues -- and I know you won't like this -- I think the GOP has played a part in this direction (if I'm right about it). While the more aggressive end of the Democrat party has taken it over, the same thing has happened in the GOP, and I think that has hurt the party at precisely the wrong time.

It's interesting how the GOP does better locally. Gerrymandering is the common cited cause, but I'm not so sure.

The GOP simply doesn't have a true, inspirational leader right now. My guess (worth roughly nothing) is that such a person will have to emerge very, very soon.

.

 

[Carla_Danger]

Okay I'll wade in and offer the first post in the new Structured Debate zone.

In his column today Jonah Goldberg proposes a thesis that liberalism as it is defined and practiced in modern day America has worn itself out. It's proponents in the media have lost their luster and are no longer able to gain much if any traction in popular appeal. The 2014 election suggested people are looking for something different. President Obama has been able to move his party far to the left, but has been unable to attract recruits to join them.

The article: Is Liberalism Exhausted RealClearPolitics

Rules for this debate:
:
1. No ad hominem. Address the member's post and make no comment on the character or motive or intent of the member himself or herself.

2. No mention of Republicans or Democrats or any other political party. Keep the focus on liberalism and whether it has or has not run its course in America.

3. Please keep criticism of specific media, political, or other personalities to a minimum.

THE QUESTION TO BE ANSWERED:

Is liberalism exhausted, i.e. has it run its course in America and will fade into the background in coming years?

Your link from RealClearPolitics is full of ad hominem and criticism of specific media outlets.

Please be specific. The link does use MSNBC as an illustration to support the point made, but I didn't see any specific criticism of it. Could you give me an example of ad hominem from the article because I definitely did miss that.

Really, you don't?

Nope. So please post the specific quotation that would show that criticism and the specific quotation that would be classified ad hominem.

Below is an ad hominem attack (from your link)

MSNBC had thought it could mimic Fox News’ success from the left. The problem is that it never understood what Fox News is.

Other MSNBC stars are being followed around by the Grim Reaper. Al Sharpton, a race-baiting tax cheat with blood on his hands, is slated to be moved out of his 6 p.m. slot, presumably so he can spend more time with his wayward teleprompter.

Furthermore, MSNBC is not liberal media, it is a corporate conglomerate. They fired Donahue in 2003 because of his anti Iraq war stance.

You're using a biased opinion piece, yet are asking us to post by a different set of standards. Why is that?

 

[Foxfyre]

Gently disagree Nosmo, and watch the references to political party. The rules specify no partis

I disagree. Liberalism, particularly populist Liberalism remains a potent political force. Many folks are disillusioned after the civil war within the GOP. Radical Conservatism is not everyone's cup of tea.

Issues like wage disparity, civil rights, America's place on the international stage and out propensity to wage war first, ask questions later are turning folks away from the hard core stances offered from the political opposition to Liberalism.

Folks are starting to understand that the policies offered from the Conservatives are actually against their self interests. That's why a Tea Party type cannot and will not win the nomination from the GOP in 2016.

Political trends come and go. But once the hard working American family realizes that their rights to collective bargaining and the programs that favor the wealthy in some magical attempt to have wealth 'trickle down' upon them are mere pipedreams in a rigged game, watch the public scorn radical Conservatism.

Watch the references to political parties Nosmo. Innocuously used here but the thread rules specify no references to political party. It helps keep the thread from dissolving into a partisan food fight.

The public has had multiple opportunities to scorn radical conservativsm but we aren't discussing radical conservatism. Liberalism has had a very generous block of time to make and demonstrate its case.

In his piece this morning, Goldberg suggests that they had their shot and the people have now weighed it, measured it, and found it wanting. And by their behavior are beginning to demonstrate their rejection of liberalism. And (again according to Goldberg), the liberals are demonstrating how out of touch they are by continuing to avoid addressing most of the things important to the people.

 

[Foxfyre]

I took from his article that the worm is that we are underestimating the ability of the American people to see and understand what is happening even if some are a lot slower to do that than others. And I want to believe he is right that liberalism may be exhausted under its own weight and the worm might be turning.

Yeah, I really don't know. Fact is, I actually agree with moderate Democrats more than I do with Republicans on a majority of the issues -- and I know you won't like this -- I think the GOP has played a part in this direction (if I'm right about it). While the more aggressive end of the Democrat party has taken it over, the same thing has happened in the GOP, and I think that has hurt the party at precisely the wrong time.

It's interesting how the GOP does better locally. Gerrymandering is the common cited cause, but I'm not so sure.

The GOP simply doesn't have a true, inspirational leader right now. My guess (worth roughly nothing) is that such a person will have to emerge very, very soon.

.

Whoops. No reference to political parties please according to the thread guidelines.

Let's translate that into ideology. What does the American people want from their leaders? From their government? Within their societies? And is Goldberg right that they are now changing loyalities to an ideology because liberalism has failed to deliver on what is most important to them?

 

[mamooth]

I am not interested in Goldberg himself in this thread.

The author and the work are inseparable. If you didn't want Goldberg discussed, you should have simply presented his ideas in your own words.

I am interested in the concepts he offered in the linked piece. Please refer to the guidelines for this thread.

And I'm interested in the effect of his preaching on the choir, which is what that piece was.

So what did he get wrong in this article?

That's a lot like saying "What's wrong with the Unibomber Manifesto? Point to specific parts!".

Is left leaning media thriving

No more or less than usual. Claims that it isn't, based on some rants about MSNBC, are unsupported wishful thinking.

Are the ranks of liberalism swelling?

Yes. Steady slow growth, that is. Especially among young people. And people tend to grow more liberal as they age.

What are the topics we most see pushed by the left these days?

Economic equality, something extremely popular with the American people. In contrast, Goldberg and pals focus almost entirely on identify politics, political correctness and playing the victim.

Can you be specific re something in the article he said that merits criticism?

Again, the piece is a rambling mess, a disjointed mass of red herrings and cherrypicks, a fundamentally gutless work that sets up strawmen instead of addressing actual liberal positions.

Liberalism now focuses mostly on economic opportunity. The piece ignores that, and instead diverts with some fabrications about how liberalism is about race and gays. It lies, that is. It's a dishonest propaganda piece.

In summary, the only evidence offered to support this premise of "liberalism is exhausted" is Goldberg's crank rant, a lot of wishful thinking, and couple conspiracy theories. If there's any actual evidence, someone might want to present it and support it.

 

[Foxfyre]

Okay I'll wade in and offer the first post in the new Structured Debate zone.

In his column today Jonah Goldberg proposes a thesis that liberalism as it is defined and practiced in modern day America has worn itself out. It's proponents in the media have lost their luster and are no longer able to gain much if any traction in popular appeal. The 2014 election suggested people are looking for something different. President Obama has been able to move his party far to the left, but has been unable to attract recruits to join them.

The article: Is Liberalism Exhausted RealClearPolitics

Rules for this debate:
:
1. No ad hominem. Address the member's post and make no comment on the character or motive or intent of the member himself or herself.

2. No mention of Republicans or Democrats or any other political party. Keep the focus on liberalism and whether it has or has not run its course in America.

3. Please keep criticism of specific media, political, or other personalities to a minimum.

THE QUESTION TO BE ANSWERED:

Is liberalism exhausted, i.e. has it run its course in America and will fade into the background in coming years?

Because I foresee the social legislation in liberalism pushed to the people and states to transfer off the plate of federal govt, I believe the liberal parties will take on this role of managing these programs, so that the formal govt can return to its intended structure, process, and checks and balances under the Constitution. Liberalism will fulfill its promises but as its own network of democratically elected hierarchy, similar to how parties, media and academic institutions operate outside govt.

I'm not seeing that though Emily. I'm seeing liberalism being rejected more and more at the federal, state, and local levels.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

If liberalism is exhausted its because its been running roughshod over the constitution for 100 years with never a single defeat or withdrawal.

If anything Obama's unanswered jihad on the 4th (nsa) and 1st (net neutering) show its now taken root in the entire political establishment.

Guys like Goldberg and Mark Levin crack me up because they can't even find the battlefield but they're declaring victory or loss

If we ever gain back a single freedom, close a single government department or program, then you can start thinking about Liberalism high water mark -- but not unitl

 

[emilynghiem]

Okay I'll wade in and offer the first post in the new Structured Debate zone.

In his column today Jonah Goldberg proposes a thesis that liberalism as it is defined and practiced in modern day America has worn itself out. It's proponents in the media have lost their luster and are no longer able to gain much if any traction in popular appeal. The 2014 election suggested people are looking for something different. President Obama has been able to move his party far to the left, but has been unable to attract recruits to join them.

The article: Is Liberalism Exhausted RealClearPolitics

Rules for this debate:
:
1. No ad hominem. Address the member's post and make no comment on the character or motive or intent of the member himself or herself.

2. No mention of Republicans or Democrats or any other political party. Keep the focus on liberalism and whether it has or has not run its course in America.

3. Please keep criticism of specific media, political, or other personalities to a minimum.

THE QUESTION TO BE ANSWERED:

Is liberalism exhausted, i.e. has it run its course in America and will fade into the background in coming years?

Because I foresee the social legislation in liberalism pushed to the people and states to transfer off the plate of federal govt, I believe the liberal parties will take on this role of managing these programs, so that the formal govt can return to its intended structure, process, and checks and balances under the Constitution. Liberalism will fulfill its promises but as its own network of democratically elected hierarchy, similar to how parties, media and academic institutions operate outside govt.

I'm not seeing that though Emily. I'm seeing liberalism being rejected more and more at the federal, state, and local levels.

Where is all the entanglement from the ACA exchange and gay marriages going to shift?
You don't think rejecting that is going to push it back to the Democrats to manage through their own party systems?
That's who I'm going to ask to clean this up, the Democrats and Greens working out sustainable programs and quit trying to lobby that through Federal Govt when it can be created locally and organized nationally by networking through Parties.

 

[Mac1958]

What does the American people want from their leaders? From their government? Within their societies? And is Goldberg right that they are now changing loyalities to an ideology because liberalism has failed to deliver on what is most important to them?

Well, I think that's the core question.

If I'm right, more and more people are warming up to the idea of more government and that slow increase will continue. If you're right, enough people are going to stop and say, "you know, now that I think about it, this really isn't what America is about".

What would cause that? I think about that quite a bit. Would it be a specific event or a slow realization?

.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Of course liberalism isn't exhausted. The runaway victory of liberal ideas in nearly every field demonstrates that.

Some of these liberal ideas are engendered with force and identity politics. I mean some of it is downright Alinskyist in nature. Ideas will always take hold if they are forced upon the masses. So, in a sense it is exhausted. It wouldn't be so vicious and vitriolic in nature if it weren't desperate for people to take to its ideals.

 

[Foxfyre]

Okay I'll wade in and offer the first post in the new Structured Debate zone.

In his column today Jonah Goldberg proposes a thesis that liberalism as it is defined and practiced in modern day America has worn itself out. It's proponents in the media have lost their luster and are no longer able to gain much if any traction in popular appeal. The 2014 election suggested people are looking for something different. President Obama has been able to move his party far to the left, but has been unable to attract recruits to join them.

The article: Is Liberalism Exhausted RealClearPolitics

Rules for this debate:
:
1. No ad hominem. Address the member's post and make no comment on the character or motive or intent of the member himself or herself.

2. No mention of Republicans or Democrats or any other political party. Keep the focus on liberalism and whether it has or has not run its course in America.

3. Please keep criticism of specific media, political, or other personalities to a minimum.

THE QUESTION TO BE ANSWERED:

Is liberalism exhausted, i.e. has it run its course in America and will fade into the background in coming years?

Your link from RealClearPolitics is full of ad hominem and criticism of specific media outlets.

Please be specific. The link does use MSNBC as an illustration to support the point made, but I didn't see any specific criticism of it. Could you give me an example of ad hominem from the article because I definitely did miss that.

Really, you don't?

Nope. So please post the specific quotation that would show that criticism and the specific quotation that would be classified ad hominem.

Below is an ad hominem attack (from your link)

MSNBC had thought it could mimic Fox News’ success from the left. The problem is that it never understood what Fox News is.

Other MSNBC stars are being followed around by the Grim Reaper. Al Sharpton, a race-baiting tax cheat with blood on his hands, is slated to be moved out of his 6 p.m. slot, presumably so he can spend more time with his wayward teleprompter.

Furthermore, MSNBC is not liberal media, it is a corporate conglomerate. They fired Donahue in 2003 because of his anti Iraq war stance.

You're using a biased opinion piece, yet are asking us to post by a different set of standards. Why is that?

Conceding that '. . .presumably so he can spend more time with his wayward teleprompter. . . ' is ad hominem. The description of Sharpton as a 'race-baiting tax cheat. . . ' is insulting, and was meant to be, but is not ad hominem. Neither, however, change the points that Goldberg is making in his piece. As for MSNBC's political leanings, every single media poll offered in the last 10 years has ranked it the most left of all the mainstream media sources out there. You can object to that but please do it on a different thread and let's don't derail this one with a discussion about that. IMO, Goldberg is more than justified in using it as his 'canary in the coal mine.'

 

[Carla_Danger]

I am not interested in Goldberg himself in this thread.

The author and the work are inseparable. If you didn't want Goldberg discussed, you should have simply presented his ideas in your own words.

I am interested in the concepts he offered in the linked piece. Please refer to the guidelines for this thread.

And I'm interested in the effect of his preaching on the choir, which is what that piece was.

So what did he get wrong in this article?

That's a lot like saying "What's wrong with the Unibomber Manifesto? Point to specific parts!".

Is left leaning media thriving

No more or less than usual. Claims that it isn't, based on some rants about MSNBC, are unsupported wishful thinking.

Are the ranks of liberalism swelling?

Yes. Steady slow growth, that is. Especially among young people. And people tend to grow more liberal as they age.

What are the topics we most see pushed by the left these days?

Economic equality, something extremely popular with the American people. In contrast, Goldberg and pals focus almost entirely on identify politics, political correctness and playing the victim.

Can you be specific re something in the article he said that merits criticism?

Again, the piece is a rambling mess, a disjointed mass of red herrings and cherrypicks, a fundamentally gutless work that sets up strawmen instead of addressing actual liberal positions.

Liberalism now focuses mostly on economic opportunity. The piece ignores that, and instead diverts with some fabrications about how liberalism is about race and gays. It lies, that is. It's a dishonest propaganda piece.

In summary, the only evidence offered to support this premise of "liberalism is exhausted" is Goldberg's crank rant, a lot of wishful thinking, and couple conspiracy theories. If there's any actual evidence, someone might want to present it and support it.

I agree.

 

[Foxfyre]

What does the American people want from their leaders? From their government? Within their societies? And is Goldberg right that they are now changing loyalities to an ideology because liberalism has failed to deliver on what is most important to them?

Well, I think that's the core question.

If I'm right, more and more people are warming up to the idea of more government and that slow increase will continue. If you're right, enough people are going to stop and say, "you know, now that I think about it, this really isn't what America is about".

What would cause that? I think about that quite a bit. Would it be a specific event or a slow realization?

.

And I'm hoping Goldberg is right that people are not only NOT warming up to the idea of more government, they are beginning to look to leaders who at least say they are opposed to that. If his article is on point, that would be properly supported by the three illustrations he used in his piece.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Is liberalism exhausted, i.e. has it run its course in America and will fade into the background in coming years?

I'll say this. I see a trend, and yes, it is becoming exhausted. And without breaking the rules, the pendulum has swung so far towards extreme liberalism, it is naturally going to swing back to the middle and to the other side. The election last year showed how far liberalism has declined. Just in the past few weeks, you have had liberals in the media exposed for lying, people like Lois Lerner being busted after all of her e-mails and tapes regarding the targeting were found, and Hillary Clinton breaking campaign finance rules. You have liberals everywhere resorting to desperate tactics in campaigns, such as using the Ferguson, Trayvon Martin and Eric Garner cases to smear opponents. An ideology that is strong doesn't need people to resort to this kind of thing, only a fading one will keep grasping for support by attacking opponents before it eventually dies out.

The seams are starting to come undone.