The Rawness

Recently Ruff posted the following comment:

Say, are you ever gonna post comments about the election?
I understand all the arguments supporting apathy or ambivalence regarding the whole circus. But I?m still interested in hearing what people think and feel about the various issues (or non-issues).

I lean conservative on a number of issues but fully support Obama but that?s irrelevant.
I?m curious as to why liberals believe the democratic platform represents them. I?m even MORE interested in learning why conservatives believe the republican platform represents them (it doesn?t). and as far as this particular election why some people still consider themselves undecided at this point in the race.

I haven’t been focusing much on the election because I’m quite apathetic about it. Neither candidate moves me. I think McCain will be a much better President than Obama, but that’s not saying much. I am frustrated with the constant bitching of the media, late night talk shows, Bill Maher, Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and their ilk. Yet at the same time I’m tired of watered down conservatism I feel that George W. Bush and McCain represent. I want a conservative that can communicate the ideas of conservatism in a way that connect with the public without having to pander to moderates, the way Reagan did.

So at this point I just want to give the Democrats the chance to stop being armchair quarterbacks and show us what they can do. Hopefully they can do a good job and show us maybe they were right all along. But in all honesty, I think liberal quasisocialist policies during a recession equals the second term of Jimmy Carter, an unmitigated disaster. And Jimmy Carter’s awful presidency was the best thing for conservatism ever. If Americans kept electing uninspiring or poorly communicating Republicans like Nixon and Ford over and over again, we never would have gotten the inspiring conservatism of Reagan, but rather just a slow ideological death for the Republican party. Ford losing opened the door for Reagan’s resounding win. Call it creative destruction. I feel McCain would be a better President than Obama, but that’s not saying much. I’d rather see some creative destruction again and just have McCain lose.

Give the Democrats the presidency and the Congress and let’s have their ideas on display for the world to see. No one to blame, no armchair quarterbacking, let them run the show. I predict the worst, but who knows, maybe I’ll be surprised.

Post comments about what I wrote or any thoughts you have on the election at all in the comments below. This is an open thread, as long as it’s election related it’s fair game.

UPDATE (10/31/2008):

This is awesome:

I’m looking to expand my views by trying some books with more of a leftist slant. In this post, I discussed my favorite conservative books. I want to try something different and read some good liberal books, but most of the liberal books I find seem to not really confront conservative viewpoints with good logic but instead tend to just sidestep the conservative arguments altogether by just responding with invective and/or smug sarcasm. It’s a frustration I find with a lot of modern progressive spokespeople, they seem to think smug condescension and sarcasm is an argument in and of itself:

The problem with sarcasm is that it pokes fun at the other side without actually making an argument. If you happen to agree with the speaker’s view already, this can be pretty entertaining: you don’t need an argument, so you enjoy the affirmation of how smart you are and how dumb the other guy is. But what if you don’t already agree? Well, in that case sarcasm doesn’t tell you very much except about the nastiness of the speaker. The sarcastic comment rather suspiciously avoids addressing the merits, and is more likely to turn off the undecided than persuade them.

It’s part of the problem I have with the Daily Show and Stephen Colbert, where people are inexplicably hailed as “geniuses” (truly an overused and increasingly meaningless word in this day and age) by the media and the progressive man-on-the-street for getting up every night and being sarcastic in front of a sympathetic audience that is dedicated to hearing their own views parroted back at them on a nightly basis. Sarcasm is simply making fun of someone by saying the opposite of what you mean. If that’s now the gold standard for “genius” than every teenage girl in America is currently a genius. And if that’s the current standard for genius, who do we use for examples of “mildly clever.” And what new word do we use to describe people like Da Vinci, Newton and Einstein?

I don’t mind sarcasm and smug condescension being used in putting forth an argument, I just hate when that is where the argument begins and ends, when it is basically the whole argument.

So back to my original question: can anyone recommend me some well-researched lefty books with convincing arguments that aim to change your views rather than just preach to the choir? So far I’ve been recommended Big Trouble by J. Anthony Lukas and the books of Eric Hobshawm. I don’t care if the author is trying to advance an agenda (honestly, who isn’t?) as long as aid agenda doesn’t lead to rampant intellectual dishonesty in the writing.