John Danforth Says the American Center Has Collapsed

[domer]

One of America's premier centrists, though among his conservative credentials is his leading support for Clarence Thomas's elevation to the Supreme Court, John Danforth has voiced the opinion that his bipartisan, consensus-building and compromise-willing philosophy are largely a thing of the past now on our national political scene. He does not know how permanent this situation is, but its passing marks a negative milestone in our public life, at least as I see things.

What do any of you think of this assessment and its implications?

[BT]

I think he is wrong.

[Lanya]

I think he's partly right.

Where I differ is that I see people coming together in opposition to the present Administration.
But there are the fringe  bomb throwers and it's very easy to listen to them: Rush, Michael Savage, etc.
  Newt Gingrish is not exactly a man who encourages people to come together and reason, and I read that his star is rising again in the Party. 
I've never heard such incivility and partisanship among people we elect to office.
I'm hoping people are as heartily sick of it as I am.

[BT]

Newt Gingrish is not exactly a man who encourages people to come together and reason

And yet he and Hillary see eye to eye on the need for health care.

Go figure.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/05/13/opinion/smith/main695090.shtml

[Mucho]

It is clear that the right wants the death of the middle. They are not happy with just having most of the money, but want the rest of us beggared so that the gap is more visible as it is in 3rd world countries. There is no end to Repub greed.

[Plane]

The center is dieing?


That place where all politicians move to and appeal to whenever it is election time?


The place that all polls seek to find and all poll following politicians try their hardest to plant themselves in?


I wish it would die , it is a nusance.

[Michael Tee]

He probably means that the centre has shifted more to the right.  And/or that there are more single-issue voters, probably due to the revolution in communications, the so-called "wired world."

One democratic alternative to winner-take-all elections with clear losers and winners is consensus-building.   Either the Israeli way, with multi-party participation and elaborate coalition-building, or the pow-wow way, which I last saw in action in the student radical movements of the 1960s.  The Israeli way seems to leave the vast majority of the citizens at the mercy of their craziest extremes, and the pow-wow way just takes too damn long, and ultimately bogs down - -  in the end, nobody's got the patience for it.  Sometimes in life, you just gotta make a decision, right, wrong or indeterminate, and then move on to the next problem.  The two-party system's probably the only way to go, flaws and all.  It's not working now because the Democrats are more afraid of not winning than they are of the system crashing.

[BT]

He probably means that the centre has shifted more to the right.  And/or that there are more single-issue voters, probably due to the revolution in communications, the so-called "wired world."

Hmmm. I think that you are wrong, also.