Wednesday, May 25, 2005


I'm not a big fan of this kind of pattern-matching numerology (whether in the stock market or in political trends), but these are some interesting observations at Templar Pundit:
2004 was a realigning election. Based on historical patterns, this means that you can expect Republicans to hold the White House for the bulk of the next 36 years. This also means that the Republican and Democrat parties will be defined by their actions now for the next 36 years.

In other words, Democrats have become the reactionary haven of lunatics like Howard Dean and ivory tower liberals like John Kerry. The Republicans will be defined as the "party of ideas" as George W. Bush has called it. These definitions will likely follow the parties around for the next few decades.

The last realigning election was in 1968. Republicans held the White House for 24 of the next 36 years. This election also led to the Democrats becoming the liberal party the Republicans becoming the conservative party as liberal Republicans and conservative Democrats were shut out of national politics.

In 1932, FDR was elected and the New Deal became the defining issue for both political parties. The Democrats held the White House for 28 of the next 36 years. In 1896, William McKinley was elected and Republicans mostly controlled the White House for the next 36 years. Republicans were defined as pro-business and the Democrats as populists. In 1860, Abe Lincoln was elected and led to an era of Republican control. In this case the agendas set for the parties is rather obvious. 1824 saw the birth of the Whigs and Democratic Party. This laid the foundation of the two-party system.

If 2004 follows the pattern, the Democrats have little shot of a lasting majority until at least 2040. In the meantime, their post-election reactionary behavior and name-calling will probably become the norm of the party.

The age of labeling the parties "conservative" and "liberal" is gone. Can a party espousing psuedo-Marxist ideologies disproved over 20 years ago be called "liberal"? Can a group of people who disparage free elections in a formerly oppressed nation out of hatred towards the President be called "liberal"? Perhaps it's more accurate to call Republicans "reformist" instead of "conservative" and Democrats "obstructionist" instead of "liberal."
I can agree with those labels however!


Post a Comment

<< Home