"Liberal" Epithet Has Lost Its Sting

by: Daniel De Groot

Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 18:48

Over the weekend, Mark Leibovich had an interesting an entertaining piece in the Times on how "socialism" has become the Republicans' new all-purpose smear word attacking Obama in particular and Democrats generally.

Now, you can have a whole conversation about whether ramping marginal tax rates back to where they were in the go-go 1990s really constitutes socialism. But a different point occurred to me when I read the piece. I think this is probably the best evidence there is that the 'liberal' label simply doesn't have the punch that it had going back a good thirty years in American politics.

If it did, they'd still be using it, since it at least has some relationship to reality. But it doesn't, so they're not.

This is an astute observation in the form of noting Holmes' "dogs that do not bark."  It appears conservatives have used up all the residual antipathy toward the liberal label.  There is polling we can piece together to back up Josh's shrewd guess:

From that LA Times/Bloomberg poll again:

Q33. How would you describe the views of Barack Obama on most matters having to do with politics: Do you generally think of Obama as very liberal, somewhat liberal, moderate, somewhat conservative or very conservative, or haven't you heard enough about him yet to say?

Response:
56% - Liberal, 15% - Moderate, 8% - Conservative

That LA Times Poll had Obama up 12 points on McCain, which led me to conclude:

Apparently being a liberal is not toxic.

I do see a positive in this situation though.  Even if Obama never embraces the liberal label, if he gets elected and governs well that will do a lot to improve the brand regardless.  The public already thinks he is a liberal, so seeing him govern well wears well on liberalism.  

I think this is still true.  Though there are many things on which Obama will and has disappointed liberals, we cannot ignore that to the non-ideological public, he is the manifestation of liberalism and they will judge it based on his success or failure, much as Bush is a lead weight around the neck of conservativism.  However, there is more recent polling to draw on, to see how true this remains and to what degree.  

CBS/New York Times

"Do you think of Barack Obama as more of a liberal, a moderate or a conservative?"

1/11-15/09

Liberal	Moderate	Conservative	Unsure
40	34	13	13

NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll

"Would you describe Barack Obama as liberal, moderate, or conservative?" If "liberal" or "conservative": "And would you say Barack Obama is very liberal/conservative or somewhat liberal/conservative?"    Half sample (Form B), MoE  ±  4.4

1/9-12/09

Very Liberal	Somewhat Liberal	Moderate	Somewhat Conservative	Very Conservative
27	22	37	3	4

Ok, so pretty clearly leading up to his inauguration, the plurality of the public still saw Obama as a liberal.  Less so than at the height of the Democratic primary, but hardly surprising given the pattern of primary/general election politics.  

Now couple that knowledge, with this:

ABC News/Washington Post Poll

"Do you think Obama's views on most issues are too liberal for you, too conservative for you, or just about right?"

1/13-16/09

Too Liberal	Too Conservative	About Right	Unsure
29	4	65	2

USA Today/Gallup Poll

"Do you think Barack Obama's political views are too conservative, about right, or too liberal?"
1/9-11/09

Too Liberal	Too Conservative	About Right	Unsure
34	5	57	4

Just as I said back in June, the public thinks Obama is a liberal, and is perfectly fine with it.  No wonder conservatives had to dust off the demagoguery of the past and resort to screeching about socialism.  It's all that's left in the barrel.    

I can't help but concern troll conservatives and warn them that overusing the s-word will end them up in the same boat as the Likud/AIPAC/neo-conservatives who have routinely called critics of Israel anti-Semitic and as Glenn Greenwald wrote:

But what is worth noting -- and celebrating -- is that a significant and palpable change has occurred.  Whereas these smear tactics once inspired fear in many people, now they just inspire pity. They no longer work.  Very few Americans are going to refrain from expressing their views on American policy towards Israel out of fear that the Jeffrey Goldbergs of the world are going to screech "anti-Semitism" at them.  Neocons are far too discredited and their policies far too self-evidently destructive for them to intimidate anyone out of questioning their orthodoxies.  Now, watching neocons recklessly spew their bitter little epithets in lieu of (and in order to suppress) debate is like watching an old, dying dragon sadly trying to breathe mighty fire from its mouth but collapsing in a debilitating coughing fit instead -- or is like watching a disgraced, post-censure Joe McCarthy in 1956 stand in an empty Senate chamber and rail against hidden Communists.  Nobody cares.

Keep calling everyone to left of Joe Lieberman a "socialist" and pretty sure conservatives will have succeeded in making socialism socially acceptable.  Bernie Sanders might soon not be alone in the ranks of elected self described socialists.

Meanwhile, we might start to see a few more self-admitted "liberals" in elected office, which would be a big change for the better, and all thanks to the conservative penchant for terminological serial murder by repetition.