Brooks helps define the current political parties

David Brooks brings a better perspective to the modern Democratic Party than the right in general and Trump in particular try to define it.

“The New Democrat Coalition is a caucus for moderate and center-left House Democrats. It has 103 House members, of whom 42 are the up-and-coming freshmen who brought the Democrats their majority. Its self-declared priorities are “pro-economic growth,” “pro-innovation” and “fiscal responsibility.”
“Right now, Republicans are a culture war identity movement that suppresses factional disagreement and demands total loyalty to Trump.”

15 thoughts on “Brooks helps define the current political parties

  1. David Brooks writes, “Biden is a man who doesn’t do culture war, who will separate the cultural left from the political left, reduce politics back to its normal size and calm an increasingly apocalyptic and hysterical nation.”

    The assumption is that Biden is up to the challenges Brooks sets for him. If he isn’t, then Brooks’ analysis amounts to irrelevant blather.

    My own view is that the Democratic Party is collapsing. I don’t say it is because Democrats have moved to the political left. I say it is because the party has no grip on reality. I mean, c’mon, man, Joe Biden has no business running for president (he’s too frail) and Kamala Harris was already rejected by the party’s own faithful.

    Democrats may be the best people on Earth, but the party has put forth the weakest presidential ticket in history. That’s not a sign of normalcy or even virtue, no matter how David Brooks sugarcoats it.


    1. Interesting comment.

      From my perspective, what you described as Democrat is the Republican Party.

      Trump was elected because he was not Hillary Clinton. His own party stalwarts hated him. However, he did have a charismatic appeal to a solid minority of a Americans who decided it was time to give the finger to politics as usual because they were left out of the recovery.

      And that minority has not changed except to grow older.

      It was an “experiment” that failed. Not necessarily because of the need for change was absent, but rather the wrong man was chosen. No matter how anyone parses the presidency under Trump, it has been a failure.

      The failure was not all Trump’s fault, he had a lot of help from his moribund party which he took over as a rubber stamp to all but the most egregious issues.

      Demographically, culturally and politically we have changed. We cannot “go back” to an era that really never existed except on Ozzie and Harriet. Simply put we have one party that won’t accept the change and another that says it is reality and let’s deal with it.


      Liked by 2 people

    2. Nominating Biden and Harris indicates a party move to the center not to the left. Even though a very large number of Democrats – including myself – would rather be looking at a Warren-Sanders ticket, we are not. And we are okay with that because NOTHING is more important than coming together to relegate Trumpism to its place as an ugly footnote in the history of this nation’s march to live up to its founding ideals.

      A party under the thumb of one authoritarian jackass, a party where dissent and discussion is not allowed is the party that is finished.

      It is always a question of whether a person running for President is up to the challenge. We already know the answer for one of the two candidates. Trump never rose to the level needed and remains to this day a small, petty, insecure little tyrant more suited for the pre-school nursery than the Oval Office.

      If Biden is “frail” what does that make Trump? He could not even walk a quarter or a mile over flat ground with other world leaders and that was three years ago.

      Liked by 2 people

    1. Brooks is so far to the left? Do you even know what you are saying? He is one of 2 solid conservatives @ NYT (with Douthat being the other). Just because he is not supportive of Trump he is now a left wing lunatic? Now that is one of the funniest things I have read this morning.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. One of the “golden rules” of politics is to define your opponent before he defines himself.

        The incumbent is always defending his record because that is real. So that leaves the politics of speculation with regards to the opponent. “What he might do” versus “what I did”.

        We are in Trump’s America, not Biden’s. That is a reality. Call it whatever you want, Trump is president and we are in a crisis.

        Where was the president in this latest screw up regarding a new stimulus? Democrats had a plan ready to go in May. McConnell and the White House dithered until a month ago, the rushed through a plan that had no support. Trump, as a president and “great negotiator” should have brought the House and Senate leadership to his office and worked a deal months ago.

        That’s what presidents do. Lead, persuade, negotiate. Not just tweet incessant and inane comments from the sidelines like a run of the mill blogger.

        Conservatives have lost leadership and, in my view, their moral compass.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. Keep in mind that all the previous stimulus packages were negotiated between the Treasury Secretary and the Pelosi-led House. The Senate didn’t get onboard until after the deal was worked out.

          McConnell has done nothing to provide much needed relief to the American middle class; only pushed for protections against lawsuits for companies who dither in their ability to protect their workers from the disease.

          Liked by 1 person

    2. Brooks is a leftist?

      All that remark tells us is where you sit on the spectrum.

      Maybe you should pay more attention to the evidence. Take almost ANY “leftist” policy idea and see what the majority of the American people think and maybe – based on evidence – you will realize that the country in your head no longer exists if it ever did.

      Liked by 2 people

    3. RE: “Brooks suffers from paralax.”

      That’s a nice way of saying that the object Brooks perceives isn’t where he imagines it to be. His observations derive from illusions.

      You are too polite.


      1. “His observations derive from illusions.”

        I think you had that backwards:

        His opinion is derived from observations.

        The two quotes I posted from the piece by Brooks are the observations. Both spot on and both real.

        Liked by 2 people

      2. RE: “The two quotes I posted from the piece by Brooks are the observations. Both spot on and both real.”

        Your two quotes are good examples of Brooks’ parallax problem. The New Democrat Coalition in the House may in fact have the characteristics Brooks describes, but it also has characteristics Brooks doesn’t see. For example, that same coalition pursued an ill-conceived, legally dubious and incompetently unsuccessful impeachment.

        His description of Republicans is similarly removed from reality. Republicans may indeed be engaged in a “culture war,” but what else would they be doing when Democrats have attacked on that front?. Brooks sees what he wants to see, not what is there.


        1. You will probably not want to believe this, but removing a cancerous Presidency is not a left-right, Conservative vs Liberal question. Not even close. There are very strong and very strident conservative voices who want this cancer removed every bit as much as any Democrat. So, when you state . . .

          “For example, that same coalition pursued an ill-conceived, legally dubious and incompetently unsuccessful impeachment.”

          a grab bag of “alternative facts” like this you are completely missing the boat.

          There was nothing “ill-conceived” about holding the President accountable. It was a matter of duty.

          There was nothing “legally dubious” either. The Constitution spells out clearly the power of the House to impeach a President for high crimes and misdemeanors. If demanding political favors of a foreign government before performing official duties does not qualify, nothing does.

          And as for “incompetently unsuccessful” you appear not to be able to recognize competence when you see it. (Which maybe explains why you seem to think Trump is competent?) The House Managers proved the Articles of Impeachment beyond any reasonable doubt. That most GOP Senators chose to “stay the course” with our criminal leader and ignore compelling evidence is on them.

          Liked by 2 people

        2. The impeachment was successful, the trial wasn’t. With McConnell in charge, the fix was in from the beginning. I suppose the House should have just passed on the impeachment for that reason.

          But sometimes principle stands in the way of expediency. The president was guilty of extorting a foreign leader for domestic political purposes. So the House did what it was Constitutionally commanded to do.

          The Senate did not.

          The culture war is purely a Republican complication caused by a search for supportwes through creating boogeymen. FOX’s War on Christmas was a perfect example of an issue that did not exist but for the crass purpose of dividing the nation for votes.

          And that, folks, is reality.

          Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s