Comments on: Divide and conquer?

By: Sam L.

Sam L. — Sat, 26 May 2012 20:28:31 +0000

Just like “it’s turtles all the way down”, it’s lies all the way down.

By: Randy

Randy — Sat, 26 May 2012 14:45:16 +0000

Are they so new that they can’t understand both the strengths and weaknesses of words like “change” and “reform” in a campaign.

Everyone wants changes and reformations, we just don’t agree on what they should be.

By: M J R

M J R — Sat, 26 May 2012 00:42:35 +0000

neo-neocon has replied:

“M J R: yes, but Obama has to appeal to more than the true believers.”

True enough. But there are many who to a degree are now seeing straight through The One, but for whom the lesser-of-evils choice nevertheless finds them choosing Obama rather than Romney — especially those who are fundamentally left-oriented while not necessarily off the charts.

(And those latter many, combined with the true believer Obamaphiles, have got Obama competitive as of today.)

No?

By: Curtis

Curtis — Fri, 25 May 2012 23:34:35 +0000

And as a counterpoint, Obama would do well to remember Hitler who turned the awesome Prussian war machine into his lapdog.

Is there any absolution in that the American equivalent of the Prussian war machine, our South, has been the core of our war machine, a war machine which we have all come to value?

By: Steve

Steve — Fri, 25 May 2012 23:26:35 +0000

I wonder if the difference between the campaign in 2008 and the campaign this year is that Obama has excluded all but a few trusted advisors who may reinforce his unrealistically high self regard. He may be running the campaign himself. He would do well to remember the triumphant Roman generals who had someone whisper in their ears ‘all glory is fleeting.’

By: Parker

Parker — Fri, 25 May 2012 23:03:32 +0000

Poor little Politico and the MSM in general. The tingles have stopped and the more honest ones are slowly coming to realize their messiah is not dividing loaves and fishes to feed the multitudes. He is not turning water into wine. Instead, a glass of wine costs north of $1,000 at a fundraising dinner. Alas, the promised utopia is merely Chicago style nasty politics and blatant corruption writ large across the 57 states. And woe is Politico because he may just succeed at dragging down the entire ticket come November.

It ain’t the way: http://tinyurl.com/3pcj7xg

By: neo-neocon

neo-neocon — Fri, 25 May 2012 22:46:17 +0000

M J R: yes, but Obama has to appeal to more than the true believers.

By: Curtis

Curtis — Fri, 25 May 2012 20:43:43 +0000

Wait, wait, wait.

One last interpretation, and given Neo’s regard for moderateness, probably the right one:

Moderates are questioning/rejecting “divide and conquer” which is making that strategy a losing strategy.

Well, if that’s the interpretation, what took them so long?

There are also Republican moderates who are dismayed at the “incivility” of the “extreme” right (as exampled by West, Malkin, Palin and Limbaugh). I heartily disagree, but think their view good medicine to maintain rationality as far as possible in the level of war one is in. (Ahh, it’s that last statement that messes it all up.)

For the views of the Republican moderates, see the following link:

http://volokh.com/2012/05/25/fumento-on-todays-right-wing-darlings/

By: Curtis

Curtis — Fri, 25 May 2012 20:33:32 +0000

Divide and conquer?

I’m attempting to figure out how Neo means that headline. Does it refer to the latest Conservative response which is dividing the Democrats? So there would be a sense of irony to the phrase?

Or does it refer to Obama’s strategy of dividing the American electorate into little islands labelled black, gay, welfare . . . ?

Or does the question mark after the phrase ques us to question whether the strategy of “divide and conquer” is working?

I’ll go with that last one combined with some of the first. “Divide and conquer,” as a sword of the left, has become a sword of the right.

By: M J R

M J R — Fri, 25 May 2012 20:12:48 +0000

“[T]here’s no way Obama could run with a ‘uniter’ message this time without sounding ludicrous to all but the most devoted Obamaphiles.”

Neo, there is no doubt in my poor, beleaguered little mind that you are very familiar with the term “cognitive dissonance”. Plus the will of the true believer to believe.