James Levy is exactly right. It's tempting to say that any rational observer would see that Republic ideals have made a pig's breakfast of this country. Yet almost half of the country would disagree with you. I suppose they would say they problem was just in the implementation.

As tommydsz says, people vote their aspirations. Look at Joe the Plumber. He doesn't have a $250,000 business. But he expects he will, and that's how he's going to vote. How do you counter that argument? "Hey Joe, wake up, we're talking reality, not daydreams." Somehow I don't think that stump speech would win many voters, no matter how realistic it is.

People don't vote for detailed policy positions; they vote for hope. Republicans couldn't offer a lot of hope this year, so they opted for the politics of fear. I guess after seven years of that, at least some folks have become immune to scare-mongering. But not enough, I think. All it would take is one crazy Jihadi in a mall at Christmas time to completely decalibrate most people's ability to rationally assess risk. Myself - I think such things are perfectly within the realm of possibility, but I'm still much more afraid of having an ocean liner fall on my head.

I also really liked Gary's remark about the relative threat to freedom between government and multinational corporations. Hell, why multi-national? There are plenty of little fuhrers running small little companies all over the place. What's the deal with America's reverence for corporations? When did this happen? I'd really like to know more about the history of this national preoccupation.

I've wondered the same thing myself. I grew up in the rural Midwest, and now I live on the east coast. One thing I'd say is that I've run into far more creepy scary gun toting survivalist mentality wing nuts in the otherwise progressive northeast than in the Midwest. Maybe they feel more encroached upon or something, but the divisions feel starker.

Republicans and Democrats alike out west have guns, or not, and it's not a big deal either way. And while the people I grew up with hold fast to their beliefs, many of which I would describe as religious lunacy, they generally comport themselves with humility and a good deal of forbearance with people who disagree with them. "Radical", either radical right or radical left, is not that common. It certainly exists - those are the speaking in tongues folks putting up all the inappropriate Jesus/abortion signs along the highway.

I left. I don't think it had much to do with philosophy (although that wasn't irrelevant), it was more about chasing opportunity. Positive feedback loop? Well, Obama just won Virginia and North Carolina. Social mobility probably had a lot to do with that. It would be really interesting to see how voting patterns correlate with migration patterns. Which party moves around the most? Heh.

There should be strings attached, yes. But government should not mandate solutions, only goals. Government should not mandate that Detroit manufacture hybrid cars, for example; they should simply set mileage, emissions, and disposal cost standards. It doesn't matter if Detroit meets those standards with gas, diesel, hydrogen, all-electric, or whatever else they can dream up.

Now I'll contradict myself and say that the Federal government _does_ need to get involved when it comes to establishing national standards for the distribution of alternative fuels. But I think it would be premature to do that just yet. There are a lot of promising options here, and we shouldn't pick a winner until they each have time for further development.

In the late eighties, I accidentally walked into a Fidelity office while looking for a different company located in the same building, where I was going to work for a bit to help earn a little spending money while in college. I asked someone in the Fidelity office for directions, he chatted me up a bit about where I went to school, etc, and offered me a job on the spot. Said he would give me the portfolios of a bunch of clients to start managing until I was able to start attracting my own clients. I knew absolutely nothing about investing whatsoever, and I was being told I could start managing people's - what? - retirement money? - kids college fund? - who knows? I found the whole proposition freakish and insane. What's even more insane is that Fidelity now manages my 401K (I have one other choice, which to my thinking, would be no less crazy - these people are all nuts).

My money is all in cash. 100%.

Glen,

You talk about the Democratic "base" as if everyone should know (and implicitly agree with) what you are talking about. I daresay your forensic technique is almost worthy of Fox News. What, exactly, is the Democratic "base"?