07 Jun 10
Originally posted by sh76Merkel and Sarkozy are long past their ascendency period. The French center-right party has been in power since 1995 and Merkel won in 2005 despite the CDU having less votes than in the previous election (the biggest swing was for The Left Party). Mostly, the SPD and Schroeder lost it rather than the CDU was on the ascendency.
Between Harper and Merkel and Sarkozy and Cameron and with the GOP poised to do well in the midterms, it seems that center-right parties have done very well in major western countries in the past few years.
Any theories as to why?
Meh.
07 Jun 10
Originally posted by sh76The democrats are pretty much center right too so no matter what happens a center right party is in ascendancy.
Between Harper and Merkel and Sarkozy and Cameron and with the GOP poised to do well in the midterms, it seems that center-right parties have done very well in major western countries in the past few years.
Any theories as to why?
I think it is partly just the ebb and flow of politics. I think in the US there is more of a backlash against incumbents than anything
07 Jun 10
1 edit
Originally posted by PalynkaDid she? I didn't even realize that.
But aren't you then picking your time frames as you see fit? Merkel lost a recent election.
In any case, even the Obama administration is fairly centrist by European standards (though I don't buy the political compass theory that it leans right, even by European standards). Obama's victory was mostly a backlash against specific problems with the Bush presidency and a result of an extremely fortuitous and perfectly timed economic crisis.
If the GOP wins big in the midterms, that should dispel any notion that Obama's election was evidence of the US swinging leftward. There is no specific major disastrous policy or scandal that has hit the Obama administration. If the Dems get thrashed in the midterms (which may or may not happen), the only reasonable interpretation will be the re-assertion of the conservative nature of the American constituency.
07 Jun 10
The left relies very heavily on large projects, the promise to make everything better for society as a whole. In the past this has mainly been by strengthening workers rights with better labour conditions and social security. The problem is that expanding these programs wholesale is getting too expensive. That is not to say that they can't be improved in some small areas, but saying 'you'll can all work x hours less a week, and we can afford it' is no longer possible. The right on the other hand, has never had to rely on these large scale programs and is thus less hit when they can't make any more big promises because of budget constraints. Long term the weakening position of Europe in the world and slower growth of wealth is already weakening the left in Europe, short term the economic crisis and budget deficits that go along with it are making that trend worse.
Just my two cents and of course far from the whole truth, but I believe this can play a role.
(Note that Obama is on the left when put in the context of my post, a big 'yes we can' project and trying to make life better for all Americans by a health care reform)
07 Jun 10
Originally posted by sh76By "she lost", I mean CDU in the recent North Rhine-Westphalia election. They still had the most votes (marginally), but it was considered a defeat for CDU as they lost about quarter of their seats.
Did she? I didn't even realize that.
In any case, even the Obama administration is fairly centrist by European standards (though I don't buy the political compass theory that it leans right, even by European standards). Obama's victory was mostly a backlash against specific problems with the bush presidency and a result of an extremely fortuitous and perfect ...[text shortened]... rpretation will be the re-assertion of the conservative nature of the American constituency.
07 Jun 10
Originally posted by sh76Im not sure about the rest, but in britain everybody's tired of the left's reckless spending, and overall incompetence. The economy was without a doubt one of the main influences on the outcome of the general election.
Between Harper and Merkel and Sarkozy and Cameron and with the GOP poised to do well in the midterms, it seems that center-right parties have done very well in major western countries in the past few years.
Any theories as to why?
07 Jun 10
Originally posted by sh76Cameron?
Between Harper and Merkel and Sarkozy and Cameron and with the GOP poised to do well in the midterms, it seems that center-right parties have done very well in major western countries in the past few years.
Any theories as to why?
Hardly in ascendancy when he cannot gain a majority. what are you talking about? The British elections were a victory for the centre-left.
07 Jun 10
Originally posted by wolfgang59I'll be the first to admit not knowing much about British politics. But how is it a victory for the center-left when the center-right party gets a clear plurality of seats?
Cameron?
Hardly in ascendancy when he cannot gain a majority. what are you talking about? The British elections were a victory for the centre-left.
08 Jun 10
Originally posted by sh76Defining center-right and center-left can be tricky and hazardous. Everyone wants to a centrist, even when they are radically off center.
I'll be the first to admit not knowing much about British politics. But how is it a victory for the center-left when the center-right party gets a clear plurality of seats?
JFK was arguably as much a right winger as Ronald Reagan, as defined by his taxing and spending policies, and his proclivity to use military force.
Bush 41 and Bush 43 were portrayed as right wingers, when their policy accomplishments moved America to the left.
Overall America has drifted to the left for more than a century, and probably will continue to slide until there is no more wealth to loot. Marxism is workable only when there is someone to pay the bills. Is anyone ever opposed to a government benefit they are going to get? Does anyone want to be the one who pays for that benefit?