The Democratic Divide

I wrote a few weeks ago about young democrats beginning to wake up a see the problems with their own party, now this week the folks over at Blue Hampshire finally began to acknowledge it as well.  They wrote a two part article which can be nicely summed up with the following quote (part 2 found in full HERE):

Who needs Republicans when you have Democrats who don't deliver on the change the people voted for and continue to support?

Or to put it another way: if the Democrats in the US Senate magically disappeared, would anybody notice?

While they understand there is a problem within their own party they fail to fully understand the problem.

People did vote for change.  They were sick of Bush and his policies and voted against Bush but they didn't vote for the things Obama and the Democrats of Blue Hampshire represent. 

Most people did not understand the "change" the Obama represented.  The "change" the Democrats of Blue Hampshire support and want are not the change the majority of this country wants and that's what is causing the divide they now see within their party.

People voted against Bush's out of control spending, they voted against his mishandling of the wars in the middle east, they voted against his violation of rights with acts such as the Patriot Act.

Obama won by pushing for "change".  He's delivered record levels of spending making Bush actually look like a fiscal conservative (which he was NOT).  His handling of the Middle East has gotten to the point of being offensively hypocritical.  How many of you reading this are aware that it has been 70 days since he has meet with the general in charge of Afghanistan?

The military general credited for capturing Saddam Hussein and killing the leader of al-Qaida in Iraq says he has spoken to President Obama only once since taking command of Afghanistan.

"I've talked to the president, since I've been here" just once, via teleconference, Gen. Stanley McChrystal told CBS reporter David Martin in a television interview that aired Sunday.

 "You've talked to him once in 70 days?" Mr. Martin followed up.

 "That is correct," the general replied.

And regarding violations of rights, not only has Obama supported the same Patriot Act that Democrats blasted Bush for stating he was violating the Constitution, but Obama has expanded upon it giving the government even more power.

Those are changes for the worse, not for the better and Democrats are slowly starting to realize that.  With public support dropping like a rock for Obama's health care plan and the types of huge protests we recently saw in DC, moderate Democrats have now realized they cannot blindly follow Obama or they will be the lemmings walking off the cliff and out of elected offices.

Kathy Sullivan posted a comment that further helps demonstrate the divide opening within the Democratic party but she fails to understand why it is opening.

Unfortunately, that response was pretty typical across the country, and now we have a Republican base that is energized and a Democratic base that is divided between the sleepers, the activists who are yanking at the arms of the sleepers saying wake up, the house is on fire, and the grumblers, who are standing outside complaining about the fire department instead of picking up an extinguisher. Althought this being the Democratic Party, any one of us could be a sleeper, a warner or a grumbler on the same day!!

Kathy would be well advised to look closer at local town politics because you can see the dynamics play out much clearer when there are no political parties in the mix.

There are mainly two groups of people, those who want low taxes and want the government to leave them alone proving only the basics (Republicans) and those who want everything and want the government to pay for it (Democrats).  Given the rules of 3 there will always be one third supporting any issue, one third against it and one third who doesn't care, as long as one side or the other doesn't pull too hard and wake up the middle third, the party or group in power will continue to stay in power and continue to be popular.

If spending goes up too much or the government enacts policies that are too over baring you'll begin to see rumbling from the middle third and if not quickly address they will begin to turn on the party in power.  Bush caused the middle 3rd and some of his own 3rd to turn against him and the Republican party by attempting to act like a Democrat, allowing the Democrats in charge of the House and Senate to spend wildly.

What Kathy is seeing now is Obama is pushing hard to please his 1/3 Democratic base but he's ignoring the dynamics of the middle 3rd and ignoring the fact that they won over some of the small government 1/3 with their lower tax claims.  By pulling too hard in his direction the middle 3rd are turning very hard against him as polls are now showing.  The Democrats who realize this are the ones who are in vulnerable seats and that's why Kathy is seeing.  They realize that Obama won the middle and even some of the right 3rds by claiming to be the lower taxes candidate less spending.  They are realizing that people were fooled by Democrats blasting Republicans for invasion of privacy into thinking Obama was the candidate that would support less government intrusions into our lives and in desperate attempts to hold their seats they are shying away from Obama and his policies.

Democrats won over the middle 3rd by proposing "change" but never made it clear to people what that "change" was, now the far left 1/3 is slowly exposing themselves and what their change equates to and it's too extreme and too far worse on the pendulum for the middle 3rd to support.

So keep on pulling Kathy.  You, Obama and you're fellow far left Democrats are doing to your party the exact same thing Bush did to the Republican party.