Neither Hagan nor Tillis is a winger
Published July 23, 2014
by Rob Christensen, News and Observer, July 22, 2014.
Hardly a day goes by that I don’t get a news release from some partisan source that says a) that Democratic Sen. Kay Hagan is too left-wing to represent North Carolina or b) that GOP Senate candidate Thom Tillis is too right-wing to represent the state.
In fact, Hagan and Tillis are fairly representative of their parties today. Both are business-oriented, and both have come under criticism from their ideological wings for not having sufficient ideological fervor. Tillis is no Ted Cruz, Hagan no Elizabeth Warren.
But while Hagan and Tillis are not ideologues, there is a wide gulf between them on the issues, reflecting the polarization of American politics.
Republicans and Democrats in Congress are now further apart than at any time in modern history, according to the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press.
During the last full session of Congress (the 112th Congress, which ran from 2011-12) every Republican senator and House member was more conservative than the most conservative Democrat. Every Democrat was more liberal than the most liberal Republican.
But as Pew points out, that was not always the case. In 1973-74, 240 House members and 29 senators were in between the most liberal Republican and most conservative Democrat in their respective chambers. Twenty years later in 1993-93, there were nine House members and three senators in between the most liberal Republican and most conservative Democrat. Today, there is no overlap.
The center in American politics has collapsed.
That can be seen in North Carolina, where center/left Democratic Reps. Heath Shuler and Larry Kissell are gone and Rep. Mike McIntyre will be soon, as are center/right Republicans such as former Reps. Jim Broyhill, Alex McMillan, and soon Howard Coble.
The elected leaders are just reflecting voters, who have become increasingly polarized. The Pew Survey found sharp differences between Democrats and Republicans on a range of issues. For example, 68 percent of Republicans believe in the statement: “Government regulation of business usually does more harm than good,” while only 29 percent of Democrats agreed. Seventy-five percent of Republicans believe “Government is almost always wasteful and inefficient,” while only 45 percent of Democrats believe that.
The same is true for other statements. “Poor people today have it easy because they get government benefits without doing anything in return” (66 percent of Republicans, 28 percent of Democrats); “Homosexuality should be discouraged by society” (43 percent of Republicans, 22 percent of Democrats).
The Pew report found that during the past 20 years, Democrats had moved more to the left than Republicans had moved to the right, particularly on social issues such as gay rights and immigration. But during the past decade, both parties have moved apart on the issue at about an equal pace.
“The Pew study shows that ideologically the country has drifted into hostile camps,” said John Davis, a veteran political analyst and editor of the Raleigh-based John Davis Political Report. “There are very few Americans that are sitting close to the middle, willing to negotiate on the important issues of the day.”
Such polarization, Davis said, is potentially destabilizing to the country, preventing it from dealing with such critical issues as the national debt and deficit spending.
“We are in these two ideological camps and are refusing to give an inch in compromising to the other side,” Davis said.
http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/07/22/4022548/christensen-neither-hagan-nor.html
July 23, 2014 at 10:33 am
Norm Kelly says:
The support of K has begun in earnest. The modification of her record and her stance on socialist issues is in full swing. 'Both are business-oriented, and both have come under criticism from their ideological wings for not having sufficient ideological fervor'.
K is business oriented? From what perspective? From the perspective of forcing businesses to spend more on employee benefits? From the perspective of accusing businesses of waging a war on women because they don't want to have to pay for expensive voluntary surgical procedures? From the perspective of reducing regulations so it's actually easier to hire people and less burdensome? K may not compare to E Warren, but she's not that far behind. K's stand on basic Demoncrat party socialist schemes isn't that far off from Warren's or Obamas. Does she support forcing people to buy insurance even if they don't want it? Does she support taxing people into compliance with central planner dictates? Does she support a tax on medical device manufacturers on gross income, unlike ANY other business in the country? Did she support the Senate bill to override the SCOTUS decision on abortive medications? Did she knowingly lie to us when she said that we could keep our doctors if we wanted? Did she knowingly lie to us when she said we could keep the insurance plan we liked if we wanted? Did she knowingly lie to us when she agreed with Obama that our insurance premiums would go down if we allowed them to implement socialized medicine phase 1? How much further left does she need to get before her left-wing allies in the media actually refer to her as left-wing? She may be in line with her party, but her party has left the Demoncrat party long ago and has transformed into the Socialist Party of America. (did you notice? i'm starting to use the occupiers terms because it appears his supporters like it. i used 'transform' because our country being free isn't good so we need to transform it to the socialist utopia envisioned by the occupier and his allies in the party and media.)
Where does K stand on creating part-time jobs to replace full-time jobs that people used to have? Where does K stand on creating full-time jobs so the central planners don't need to force the minimum wage increase so they can claim real wages have gone up? The minimum wage ploy is simply to improve the economic numbers for the socialist party, not to do anything useful for the country. Where does K stand on amnesty for illegal aliens? Does K refer to them as undocumented citizens like her party insists? Or does K take the more honest approach and refer to them as illegal aliens? Does K support the party scheme to allow these law-breakers to become citizens even though their first act was to break our national law(s)? How does amnesty for millions of low-wage illegal aliens actually help improve the lives of average real American citizens? These are mostly unskilled workers who will be taking low-income, part-time, minimum wage jobs that will allow them to take advantage of many government give-away programs. Not a net income to the government but a net expense to all of us. The only thing amnesty does for the country is create a new batch of demon voters. Nothing good for the country, but good for the party. Does K support the party more than she supports our state and our nation? If she supports amnesty and minimum wage increase, then yes she supports the party more. Anyone who is more interested in the party than the country does NOT deserve to be in office.
Though I expect her allies in the media to continue to tell us how centrist she is. I expect the noise & disturber to continue to tell us wonderful things about K. I expect K and her media allies will continue to distance her from the current occupier, at least until the election is over. Then she'll become best buds with the occupier once again and continue to support his lawlessness as well as the schemes of the demon party.
She's not left enough? By whose standards? Can we survive if she is any more left? What would K moving left actually look like and how would it be different from her current position?
July 23, 2014 at 12:54 pm
jimmy rouse says:
I think Kay will win easily. She will get 100% of the Democrats and 100% of the GOP right wingers who are mad at Tillis for defeating Brannon.
Tillis will only get the establishment GOP vote and they are pretty disillusioned and may not even go to the trouble.
The Tea Party crowd is also supporting Fjeld and Clay claiming that they are both more conservative than Walker and Renee.
The Democrats should roll with the help of the angry Tea Party base. Strange but true.
