The Ostrich Party

Joe Nocera is a columnist at the New York Times, he's a business commentator for NPR, and he's a former Newsweek editor...

He's not a poster child for the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy.

Today he took to the pages of the Gray Lady to offer sharp criticism of Paul Ryan's plan. He calls Ryan's "wrongheaded," "mean-spirited ," "absurd," and says it will make "health care far less affordable for millions of people."

BUT...

He praises Paul Ryan (very sparingly) and suggests that we can no longer afford to dismiss serious proposals for Medicare reform with a patellar reflex kick, even if those grody, gross, nasty, disgusting conservatives are at the negotiating table.

To my ears, that sounds like fairly reasonable left-of-center advice from a loyally progressive point of view.

But Nocera's op-ed is not nearly shrill enough for the professional left. Here are some of their reactions:

Paul Krugman, NYT:

...while some people are still trying to praise Ryan for starting a useful conversation, the reality is that he’s totally unwilling to let facts enter the debate. Look at his exchange with Ezra Klein over health care costs: this is not the sound of a sincere, open-minded guy.

Hullabaloo:

This is the new columnist for the NY Times, not some windbag blogger. And he's spouting the most shallow analysis of the current Medicare debate possible. And, sadly, it's probably going to have an influence on the way the Villagers see it.

No More Mister Nice Blog:

...the Republicans will never negotiate in good faith. You can't show them numbers demonstrating that their assumptions are wrong, because their numbers can't be wrong -- the God of the Free Market would not forsake her people. Either that or the God of the Free Market would not forsake anyone who did not deserve to be forsaken. They don't negotiate from our reality -- the one we think of as everyone's common reality. They're completely faith-based.

Washington Monthly:

"Nocera wants to give Ryan credit for noticing problems with [Medicare]. But that’s not just overly generous, it’s also setting the bar for seriousness way too low."

Comments at The Mahablog:

Dear Joe Nocera,

Would you start a serious debate with the economic terrorists who held your family hostage at the point where they tell you that no matter what you offer, the starting point is the your Grandparents are [f*ckng] goners?

If the zealots of the hard left insist on keeping their heads deeply buried (or if they choose to cannibalize anyone from their camp who dares to treat conservatives like human beings) that's their prerogative. But it's time for them to get out of the way and let the adults get down to business.

From Limbaugh's Lips To America's Ears: Americans Say Obama Will Fail

Rush Limbaugh's hopes have become America's expectations:

Washington (CNN) - President Barack Obama enters the new year with a growing number of Americans pessimistic about his policies and a growing number rooting for him to fail, according to a new national poll...

"Twelve months ago a majority of the public said that they thought Obama's policies would succeed; now that number has dropped to 44 percent, with a plurality predicting that his policies will likely fail."

Americans are also glad that the Dems' monopoly on power has been busted, but their expectations for the GOP's performance is low:

...while a majority of the public says Republican control of the House of Representatives is good for the country, only one in four say the GOP will do a better job running things than the Democrats did when they controlled the chamber.

Good. Keep the expectations low and the leashes short.

Discussion: Memeorandum

X-posted

Updates:

Raw numbers on the failure question:

In general, do you think it is more likely that Obama's policies will succeed or more likely that his policies will fail?

Succeed 44%

Fail 47%

In general, do you hope that Barack Obama's policies will succeed or do you hope that his policies will fail?

Succeed 61%

Fail 27%

More bad news for progs: Americans have more confidence in Republicans in Congress than in Obama or the Democrats. In fact, Republicans crush the Democrats...

Thinking about the major issues facing the country today, who do you have the most confidence in -- Barack Obama, or the Republicans in Congress, or the Democrats in Congress?

Obama 35%

Republicans in Congress 40%

Democrats in Congress 15%

Some "glass half empty" analysis from an astute commenter at Gateway Pundit:

So… 35% of the people are mentally ill? That’s really sad.

Add the 35% to the 15% who think the Pelosi/Reid Congress is just ducky, and this country is in serious trouble.

Caveats:

1. CNN reports that a growing number of Americans are "rooting" for Obama to fail, but in their poll they ask respondents whether they hope Obama's policies fail, not whether Mr. Obama fails:

In general, do you hope that Barack Obama's policies will succeed or do you hope that his policies will fail?

2. This poll does not reflect the views of the voters:

Interviews with 1,008 adult Americans conducted by telephone by Opinion Research Corporation on December 17-19, 2010. The margin of sampling error for results based on the total sample is plus or minus 3 percentage points.

Remember... polls of the general adult population generally give results that are more sympathetic to Democrats (in contrast to polls that only include Americans who vote).

3. Demographic data on the poll sample are conspicuously absent.

Full poll results.

Republicans Won the Internet?

Conservatives are enjoying great success with social media. The Massachusetts senate race illustrates that fact very vividly.

Liberals are wailing and gnashing their teeth, but they are learning. And eventually they will catch up. In the meantime, we need to accurately acknowledge who has been responsible for winning recent online battles.

I disagree with those who say that in recent elections, the GOP "won the internet." Republicans didn't win the internet. Grassroots conservatives did. Scott Brown's remarkable win in Massachusetts gives the impression that some Republicans have awoken to the power of social media, but the Beltway GOP has no bragging rights.

As evidenced by their surprisingly weak presence in the online world, few Republican leaders understand how much the social media have changed the world.

Twitter has changed the game entirely. William Jacobson takes note:

While Facebook and blogs were important to fundraising and messaging, Twitter is what allowed pro-Brown activists to stay in contact with each other, to feed each other news links, and generally to keep up each other's spirits at a time when the radar was showing that Brown had no chance.

I don't think it is an exaggeration to say that this was the first American Twitter revolution.

Rep. John Culberson (R-TX) told us this was coming:

We could move heaven and earth when the American people understand the power of social media, and everybody is simultaneously, of their own free will, asking their elected representatives to take action. There's not an elected official in the nation who could withstand that. And we the people, we'll take back our government — once people understand how easy this is.

The results of the Twitter revolution have been amazing, but the GOP should not take credit:

January 19 was an amazing day for grass-roots conservatism. But the Beltway GOP should be warned against unjustified triumphalism. They were late to the game. Activists still haven’t, and won’t, forget the massive amounts of money Washington, D.C. Republicans wasted on Dede Scozzafava. And Scott Brown quite noticeably didn’t mention the word “Republican” once during his prepared remarks...

The Brown victory was very clearly a strike against machine politics of all kinds and business as usual in Washington. That includes top-down meddling by tired old GOP operatives. The party bosses have tried to install their preferred Senate candidates in Florida, Colorado, and California. They will use Brown’s win to argue for more “mooooooderation.” As I wrote yesterday in my analysis of how Brown unified a center-right-indie coalition, that is not the lesson of the Massachusetts miracle.

The social media are important tools, but they won't help to get the GOP very far if establishment Republicans don't embrace and hold on to conservative principles. The vast majority of conservative bloggers and social media users are more loyal to their principles than they are to the still-tarnished Republican brand. If the GOP abandons its conservative base, the internet ATM will break down and the online soldiers will log off.

The Tea Party movement has gravitated toward independent candidates who are willing and able to take on the establishment machines (e.g., NY-23, MAsen, Chuck Devore). The strong anti-incumbent sentiment rolling across the land will favor candidates who don't come across as old-school insiders. If the GOP doesn't figure that out pronto, we will soon see the same kind of apathy on the right that we currently see on the left, and the Democrats will hold on to more power than they deserve.

More

Conservatives: Beware of McCain Regression Syndrome

Candidates who would have had no chance before the Internet can now overcome huge odds.

Illinois Senate Race: The Beltway GOP establishment has made another BIG mistake.

Waterloo in 2010

Even die-hard liberals now admit that the elections of 2010 are likely to decimate the Democrats. The results of a new question added to the DK tracking poll portends doom:

QUESTION: In the 2010 Congressional elections will you definitely vote, probably vote, not likely vote, or definitely will not vote?

Voter Intensity: Voting/NOT Voting

Republican Voters: 81/14

Independent Voters: 65/23

Democratic Voters: 56/40

Delving a little deeper into the numbers, 15% of Democrats say they're definitely not voting, compared to only 5% of Republicans who say the same.

Another thing to keep in mind while looking at these numbers: Lately, as a group, Independents have been drifting further to the right. If these numbers hold up, Democrats will be crushed in 2010.

If the Democrats seem suicidal in their quest to upend the health care system, it's because they are expecting massive losses in 2010 no matter what they do in the interim. They are on a kamikaze mission. Don't expect the Dems to be swayed by concerns about self-preservation.

Via Memeorandum

More

Poll Paints Ugly 2010 Picture for Democrats

Apples & Oranges: Don't let the pundits mislead you on ObamaCare polling

Dems' kamikaze mission: Health care by New Year's

Krauthammer: Kill the Bills. Do Health Reform Right

Transcript: Obama's West Point Afghanistan Speech

R. S. McCain: Is Kathleen Parker's Evil Underrated?

The Ten Tribes: Where Do You Fit In?

Why do some people vote against their economic self-interest?   Why do "working class" and rural Americans vote for pro-business Republicans?  What accounts for the existence of limousine liberals?  There are, of course, many answers to these questions.  The answers will help us understand how conservatives can gain political ground. 

Core Values drive voters' politics.  Voters are different from each other because they have different core values.  Swing voters, in particular, vote on values, not on policy.  This helps to begin to understand why voters sometimes vote against what would appear to be their self-interest.

Voters' decisions tend to be driven by five Core Values:

1. Extending opportunity
   
2. Working within a community
   
3. Achieving independence
   
4. Focusing on family
   
5. Defending righteousness

Analysts have shown that they can reliably predict how a voter will vote by asking questions that pinpoint the voter's core value.  Voters can be divided into "tribes" on the basis of the core value that tends to have the biggest impact on their voting decisions.  

Spotlight Analysis, a consulting agency, has taken information such as neighborhood details, family sizes, and purchasing behavior, and has grouped nearly every American of voting age — 175 million of us — into 10 "values" tribes [two groups for each of the five core values]. Fellow tribe members may not share the same race or religion, or fall into the same income bracket, but they have common feelings about the issues that transcend politics.

The ten groups are illustrated below:

As you read the description of the groups below, think about where you fit in.

Resourcefuls

These firebrand voters tend to have little respect for entrepreneurs.  They are keenly interested in government-mediated equalization of opportunity. They are less likely than members of other tribes to be college educated, married or to have children living at home.

Stillwaters

The largest of the ten tribes, this crowd consists of uncommitted, independent-minded, idealistic Democrats who have little interest in faith-based living.

Crossing Guards

Members of this community-oriented tribe are motivated by their desire for material success and career satisfaction.

Inner Compasses

These people focus on working within a community and insist on fitness in the physical, moral and financial sense.

Barn Raisers  

This group believes in "playing by the rules" and "keeping promises." They adhere to faith-based living.  They're entrepreneurial and active in community organizations but are ambivalent about government.  Barn Raisers are slightly less likely to have a college education than other swing groups. 

           

Hearth Keepers

Members of this group tend to focus on family satisfaction and faith, but they resent attempts to politicize these values and are less committed than Barn Raisers. Hearth Keepers resist marketing intrusions into their private lives.

Right Clicks 

Sometimes described as "techno-libertarians", Right Clicks are comfortable with new technology and comprise a Republican-leaning tribe.  They flocked Ross Perot in 1992.  Like their cousins in the tribe of Civic Sentries, Right Clicks are united by their commitment to family.

Civic Sentries

Less rambunctious than the Right Clicks, Civic Sentries tend to worry about safety and economic security. They're described as "righteous, free-market social conservative types who want to protect what they consider U.S. values such as self-reliance."

Stand Pats

Members of this group believe that today's societal trends "menace a lifestyle committed to patriotism, faith, family, community and morality."

Boot Strappers

This is a conservative group committed to individual initiative.  They are "alloyed by a strong belief in a divine hand in human affairs."

In races decided by one or two percentage points, the party that pinpoints a few thousand individual voters in the right places could come out on top.  By understanding how the Core Values motivate voters in each of the ten tribes differently, conservatives can take back the GOP and take back the nation.  If this is, or ever was, a center-right nation, it is because conservatives have a firm grasp on all five core values. In this regard, conservatives have an advantage over liberals.

To which group do you belong?

Online Surveys & Market Research

Update: Do the names of the tribes really fit their description?  Check out the discussion in the comments section.