• strict warning: Non-static method view::load_views() should not be called statically in /home/conserva/public_html/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 864.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::db_objects() should not be called statically in /home/conserva/public_html/sites/all/modules/views/includes/view.inc on line 1417.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_argument::init() should be compatible with views_handler::init(&$view, $options) in /home/conserva/public_html/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_argument.inc on line 744.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter::options_validate() should be compatible with views_handler::options_validate($form, &$form_state) in /home/conserva/public_html/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_filter.inc on line 607.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter::options_submit() should be compatible with views_handler::options_submit($form, &$form_state) in /home/conserva/public_html/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_filter.inc on line 607.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter_node_status::operator_form() should be compatible with views_handler_filter::operator_form(&$form, &$form_state) in /home/conserva/public_html/sites/all/modules/views/modules/node/views_handler_filter_node_status.inc on line 13.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_plugin_style_default::options() should be compatible with views_object::options() in /home/conserva/public_html/sites/all/modules/views/plugins/views_plugin_style_default.inc on line 24.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_plugin_row::options_validate() should be compatible with views_plugin::options_validate(&$form, &$form_state) in /home/conserva/public_html/sites/all/modules/views/plugins/views_plugin_row.inc on line 134.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_plugin_row::options_submit() should be compatible with views_plugin::options_submit(&$form, &$form_state) in /home/conserva/public_html/sites/all/modules/views/plugins/views_plugin_row.inc on line 134.
  • user warning: Table './conserva_drupal/cache_filter' is marked as crashed and should be repaired query: SELECT data, created, headers, expire, serialized FROM cache_filter WHERE cid = '2:fa04e86b9bf3b1b3d564bb452fb5437a' in /home/conserva/public_html/includes/cache.inc on line 27.
  • user warning: Table './conserva_drupal/cache_filter' is marked as crashed and should be repaired query: UPDATE cache_filter SET data = '<p>FAIRNESS: November 29, 2019</p>\n<p><img alt=\"\" src=\"http://www.conservativechronicle.com/sites/default/files/Barone.gif\" /></p>\n<p>It&rsquo;s Thanksgiving week in a country whose warring political tribes are not much inclined to giving thanks. But any American with a reasonable historic perspective can easily find reasons to do so.</p>\n<p> FOR ONE thing, it&rsquo;s clear that we are a much fairer nation than we were in the past. Women, black Americans, immigrants and minorities of any perceptible kind are treated more fairly and in a more friendly manner than was the case within the memory of many of us now living.<br />\n Evidence of this comes from the strained attempts of those who criticize the country and desperately insist that things are just as bad as they ever were. The New York Times&rsquo; The 1619 Project, for example, insists that anti-black racism is the central theme of American history. Author Ta-Nehisi Coates seems to argue that American racism is as strong today as ever &mdash; and always will be.<br />\n A more sensible estimate comes via an interview by World Socialist Web Site&rsquo;s Tom Mackaman of Princeton historian James McPherson, the nation&rsquo;s premier Civil War historian. The Times, surprisingly, did not interview McPherson for its 1619 Project articles, which he called &ldquo;a very unbalanced, one-sided account.&rdquo;<br />\n Slavery and racism were part of the American story, he argued, but so are anti-slavery and civil rights movements. And &ldquo;the idea that racism is a permanent condition, well that&rsquo;s just not true,&rdquo; he said. You don&rsquo;t have to match McPherson&rsquo;s mastery of the subject &mdash; few do &mdash; to know that&rsquo;s true.<br />\n Most black Americans, the group with the most firsthand exposure to examples of anti-black racism &mdash; agree with him. Political polling shows that any increase in those believing that racism is an impenetrable barrier to black Americans comes not from blacks but from liberal white college graduates.<br />\n In his New York Times blog, Thomas Edsall cites research showing many black voters have shifted from blaming racial discrimination for blacks&rsquo; statistical disadvantages to blaming individual-based behavior.<br />\n Since Donald Trump&rsquo;s election, affluent white college graduates have increasingly blamed racism. As evidence they often cite 1930s New Deal housing programs&rsquo; &ldquo;redlining&rdquo; and the 1955 murder of Emmett Till. This desperate hunt for unfairness in the distant past and the insistence that nothing has changed are pure virtue signaling, untethered to observations of contemporary American life.<br />\n Actual contemporary evidence indicates blacks are doing better in a fairer society. Crime rates, incarceration rates and teen pregnancy rates are way down from the 1990s, as Columbia undergraduate Coleman Hughes writes in Quillette. And bachelor&rsquo;s degrees and life expectancies are way up. Not entirely unconnected with this is the perhaps politically awkward fact that lower-income and minority Americans have been experiencing record-low unemployment and higher-than-average wage gains during the last three years.</p>\n<p> COMPLAINTS still come in saying that social mobility is decreasing, and that various elite educational and economic categories do not contain the same percentages of blacks and some other minorities as the larger society. But it is an illusion of social engineers that a free society can be arranged with identical percentages of every identifiable group in every identifiable category. And it is a fact &mdash; a melancholy fact, perhaps, but a fact &mdash; that an increasingly fair society will have a decreasing degree of social mobility.<br />\n That&rsquo;s because in a fair society, people tend to end up in places where they started off. In a society like ours, with increasing assortative mating (people marrying those with similar interests and abilities), both nature and nurture &mdash; hereditary traits and child-rearing practices &mdash; tend to produce a generation of relatively few people with the capacity and inclination to climb, or fall down from, the socioeconomic ladder.<br />\n The good news is that our advanced and increasingly fair society has many such ladders and many fewer barriers. And as a recent academic study published by the National Academy of Sciences finds: &ldquo;Americans overestimate the intergenerational persistence in income ranks. They overestimate economic prospects for children from rich families and underestimate economic prospects for those from poor families.&rdquo;</p>\n<p> MANY academics and journalists seem fixated on income inequality and the gap between billionaires and others. Ordinary Americans seem more concerned about fairness &mdash; they embrace equal treatment and reject racial quotas and preferences &mdash; and about showing equal respect to fellow citizens regardless of income or wealth. This is all reason for thanks, in my view, in an increasingly fair nation &mdash; one that can get fairer still if social engineers stay out of the way.</p>\n<p> Michael Barone is a senior political analyst for the Washington Examiner, resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and longtime co-author of The Almanac of American Politics.</p>\n', created = 1575888933, expire = 1575975333, headers = '', serialized = 0 WHERE cid = '2:fa04e86b9bf3b1b3d564bb452fb5437a' in /home/conserva/public_html/includes/cache.inc on line 112.
  • user warning: Table './conserva_drupal/cache_filter' is marked as crashed and should be repaired query: SELECT data, created, headers, expire, serialized FROM cache_filter WHERE cid = '2:597abb538f89b2bf6a16e454e4f501db' in /home/conserva/public_html/includes/cache.inc on line 27.
  • user warning: Table './conserva_drupal/cache_filter' is marked as crashed and should be repaired query: UPDATE cache_filter SET data = '<p>TRUMP PRESIDENCY: November 22, 2019</p>\n<p><img alt=\"\" src=\"http://www.conservativechronicle.com/sites/default/files/Barone.gif\" style=\"width: 300px; height: 116px;\" /></p>\n<p>&ldquo;The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-Events in America&rdquo; is the title of a 1960s book by historian and librarian of Congress Daniel Boorstin. Pseudo-events, he wrote, are staged solely to generate news media coverage. Real events involve independent actors and have unpredictable outcomes. Pseudo-events are shows.</p>\n<p> IT&rsquo;S NOT difficult to say which category the House Democrats&rsquo; impeachment hearings belong in. It&rsquo;s a classic pseudo-event stage-managed to prod sympathetic media into running predictable stories. Inconvenient questions from Republican members are blocked, and the name of the original &ldquo;whistleblower&rdquo; is concealed, though the stage managers know who he is.<br />\n Yet on the front pages and cable news breaking-news bulletins, this pseudo-event is crowding out two genuine events of potentially world-shaking importance and uncertain outcome.<br />\n President Donald Trump is going to be impeached by the House and will not be removed from office by the Senate. But the potential for regime change &mdash; or regime rigidification &mdash; resulting from the prolonged rioting in Hong Kong and recent protests in Iran is hugely consequential and entirely unpredictable.<br />\n Foreign policy analysts classify nations as either upholders or disruptors of a world order. The disruptors in the years after World War I were Germany, Italy and Japan. The upholders failed to prevent them from triggering World War II. Since the end of the Cold War, the major disruptors have been China, Iran and Russia. Now the first two are facing vigorous protests and regime-change threats.<br />\n The nearly six months of protests in Hong Kong reflect a rejection of China&rsquo;s increasingly authoritarian state, which, armed with artificial intelligence facial-recognition technology, threatens an Orwellian eradication of freedoms.<br />\n Will dictator-for-life Xi Jinping crack down violently in Hong Kong as Deng Xiaoping did in Tiananmen Square in 1989? Not clear. There would be costs internationally, but China is growing less dependent on exports to the U.S. and advanced countries. That&rsquo;s partly due to Trump&rsquo;s tariff threats but also to the fact that Chinese wages are no longer rock bottom and China&rsquo;s labor force is growing smaller.<br />\n So as China is disengaging from America, Xi may be willing to endure a backlash from a violent crackdown in Hong Kong. How does America deal with a more hostile and less economically connected &mdash; and potentially much more disruptive &mdash; China? Both houses of Congress passed unanimous resolutions backing protesters&rsquo; demands, but beyond that it&rsquo;s not clear that anyone knows how to influence the regime&rsquo;s behavior.<br />\n On Iran, Trump and the Democrats have opposite positions. Former President Barack Obama signed a nuclear agreement with Iran that he hoped would lead to friendly cooperation in the Middle East &mdash; hopes that were never fulfilled. Trump renounced the agreement and has squeezed the Iranian economy with results that may have sparked the current protests. They&rsquo;re serious enough for the mullah regime to have largely shut down Iran&rsquo;s isolated internet.</p>\n<p> WILL THEY lead to regime change? Iran&rsquo;s &ldquo;green&rdquo; protests in 2009, largely ignored by the Obama administration, didn&rsquo;t. These may not either. But history shows that peaceful protests can &mdash; sometimes &mdash; topple a tyrannical regime, even though it&rsquo;s hard to predict just when. Former President Ronald Reagan envisioned the fall of the Berlin Wall and former Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan the collapse of the Soviet Union, but neither knew those things would happen in November 1989 and December 1991, respectively.<br />\n It&rsquo;s possible that the regimes of post-Mao China and the mullahs&rsquo; Iran might collapse after 40 years of tyranny. Or, less happily and more likely, these regimes may sweep aside the protests and last for centuries, like so many Chinese dynasties and Persian monarchies. Real events have uncertain and possibly momentous outcomes.<br />\n Not so with the impeachment hearings. Witnesses are heard complaining that Donald Trump subverted the &ldquo;formal interagency policy process&rdquo; and pressured &mdash; &ldquo;bribed&rdquo; is the focus group-determined verb Democrats are now using &mdash; Ukraine&rsquo;s government for political gain. But Ukraine is not a formal U.S. ally, and Barack Obama refused to even provide it defense weapons when Russia seized its territory in Donbas and Crimea. Now we&rsquo;re told that Trump should be ousted from office for a two-month delay in delivering the aid for those weapons.&nbsp;<br />\n &ldquo;The executive power,&rdquo; Article II of the Constitution states, &ldquo;shall be vested in a president of the United States of America,&rdquo; and Trump, as the career diplomats testifying have acknowledged, has no obligation to follow &ldquo;interagency consensus.&rdquo; It&rsquo;s hard to avoid concluding that Democrats who detest Trump seized on this weak pretext for impeachment when the charges of Russian collusion they brandished for three years turned out to be baseless.</p>\n<p> POLLS show support for impeachment declining. Americans, it turns out, don&rsquo;t have to read Boorstin to recognize a pseudo-event when they see one.</p>\n<p> Michael Barone is a senior political analyst for the Washington Examiner, resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and longtime co-author of The Almanac of American Politics.</p>\n', created = 1575888933, expire = 1575975333, headers = '', serialized = 0 WHERE cid = '2:597abb538f89b2bf6a16e454e4f501db' in /home/conserva/public_html/includes/cache.inc on line 112.
  • user warning: Table './conserva_drupal/cache_filter' is marked as crashed and should be repaired query: SELECT data, created, headers, expire, serialized FROM cache_filter WHERE cid = '2:83922bf44f064ffb5b3f13fefbacbbed' in /home/conserva/public_html/includes/cache.inc on line 27.
  • user warning: Table './conserva_drupal/cache_filter' is marked as crashed and should be repaired query: UPDATE cache_filter SET data = '<p>2020 ELECTION: November 15, 2019</p>\n<p><img alt=\"\" src=\"http://www.conservativechronicle.com/sites/default/files/Barone.gif\" style=\"width: 300px; height: 116px;\" /></p>\n<p>Michael Bloomberg has delivered his latest delicious hint about running for president. Former Attorney General Eric Holder is fresh from taking credit for the new Democratic legislative majorities in Virginia, making it known he might be interested. And former Gov. Deval Patrick joined the presidential race after reportedly discerning a demand for another presidential candidate from Massachusetts. At this point, it might be helpful to note some patterns in former Democratic presidential nomination contests that might help late entrants.</p>\n<p> THE FIRST is that opinion sometimes flows very rapidly and sweeps everything in its path, like lava down a volcano, like mud after the collapse of a dam, like the tide ebbing in the Bay of Fundy.<br />\n One example goes back to 1984 when Democrat Walter Mondale won 49% in a field of (only!) eight candidates in the Iowa caucuses. A fine performance, but all the attention went to Gary Hart, who, with his &ldquo;new Democrat ideas,&rdquo; ran second with 17%. Hart swept New Hampshire 37 to 28% and won states like Florida and Massachusetts. Only Mondale&rsquo;s appeal to blue-collar whites &mdash; a splinter group among today&rsquo;s Democrats &mdash; helped him recover in Michigan, Illinois and New York and win the nomination.<br />\n Opinion flowed even more inexorably 20 years later. Anti-Iraq War Vermont Gov. Howard Dean attracted huge crowds and led polls in 2003, and on primary eve, Des Moines, Iowa, was swarming with Deaniacs in characteristic orange knit caps. But opinion was flowing away from Dean to the long-lagging John Kerry, who beat Dean 38 to 32%. After that, opinion just kept flowing. Kerry lost Vermont, the Carolinas and Oklahoma and won the rest of the states.<br />\n Sometimes Democratic opinion doesn&rsquo;t move much. The same demographic divisions prevailed in the close 2008 and 2016 races. In 2008, Hillary Clinton got enough support from &ldquo;beer Democrats&rdquo; to lead Barack Obama in votes and primary delegates, but his support from blacks and &ldquo;wine Democrats&rdquo; got him enough caucus wins and superdelegates for the nomination.<br />\n In 2016, Clinton lost beer Democrats to Sen. Bernie Sanders but won big-enough majorities from blacks, Hispanics and wine Democrats to win the nomination. This year, the holds of any candidate on these groups seem weak enough that a late enterer might hope that opinion will flow like lava to them.<br />\n Moreover, and this is my second point, wine Democrats may be numerous enough now to be analyzed as two demographic segments. Sen. Elizabeth Warren&rsquo;s and Bernie Sanders&rsquo; big-government promises have attracted many white college graduates. But polling suggests they are &ldquo;jug wine&rdquo; folks, teachers and social workers with grad school degrees entitling them to public-employee union wage increases, and millennial 30-somethings still hoping to find themselves.</p>\n<p> THAT MAY leave &ldquo;champagne Democrats&rdquo; up for grabs. In 2016, Sanders got more votes than Clinton from whites, but she handily carried the communities with the highest income &mdash; Manhattan; Greenwich, Connecticut; New Trier Township in suburban Chicago; Lincoln and Lexington, Massachusetts; and Grosse Pointe and Bloomfield Hills, Michigan. Sanders&rsquo; bland approval of 70% tax rates probably hurt him, and Warren&rsquo;s wealth tax may hurt her more, an obvious possible opening for a newcomer.<br />\n The third opening for late entrants could be black voters. Current polling shows Joe Biden, former President Barack Obama&rsquo;s vice president, leading among blacks. But Eric Holder, self-described as Obama&rsquo;s &ldquo;wingman,&rdquo; has claims for that credential. He and Deval Patrick might enthuse the many black voters Sens. Cory Booker and Kamala Harris have failed to stir.<br />\n More important perhaps is the fact that black voters, with their above-average religious ties, currently say they&rsquo;re &ldquo;less liberal&rdquo; than most white Democrats on many cultural issues including supposed racial issues. As Columbia undergraduate (and rap performer) Coleman Hughes and New York Times writer (and veteran political reporter) Thomas Edsall both report, younger blacks are more concerned about creating jobs than climate change and believe that individual behavior is holding many blacks back more than societal racism. Reparations are not their thing, and they&rsquo;re the demographic group least supportive of same-sex marriage and trans rights.</p>\n<p> TRADITIONALLY, blacks have voted almost unanimously for one candidate, a rational strategy for voters who see themselves as part of a group subject to systematic discrimination and disrespect. But there&rsquo;s evidence &mdash; Bernie Sanders&rsquo; holding Hillary Clinton to 68% of black votes in Michigan in 2016 and recent polls showing young black men significantly less Democratic than their elders &mdash; that suggests such unanimity may be outmoded as blacks&rsquo; incomes surge upward and overt discrimination becomes less and less common.<br />\n So a late-starting presidential campaign may not be hopeless, maybe not even for Hillary Clinton.</p>\n<p> Michael Barone is a senior political analyst for the Washington Examiner, resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and longtime co-author of The Almanac of American Politics.</p>\n', created = 1575888933, expire = 1575975333, headers = '', serialized = 0 WHERE cid = '2:83922bf44f064ffb5b3f13fefbacbbed' in /home/conserva/public_html/includes/cache.inc on line 112.
  • user warning: Table './conserva_drupal/cache_filter' is marked as crashed and should be repaired query: SELECT data, created, headers, expire, serialized FROM cache_filter WHERE cid = '2:e9941fd406b10cdef37bca807fa723b9' in /home/conserva/public_html/includes/cache.inc on line 27.
  • user warning: Table './conserva_drupal/cache_filter' is marked as crashed and should be repaired query: UPDATE cache_filter SET data = '<p>2020 ELECTION: November 8, 2019</p>\n<p><img alt=\"\" src=\"http://www.conservativechronicle.com/sites/default/files/Barone.gif\" /></p>\n<p>Have you noticed that the two parties&rsquo; fields of presidential candidates have, in the past two election cycles, grown enormously larger than (if not necessarily superior to) those in past years? Where parties used to have two to five serious candidates to choose from, Republicans had 17 in 2016, and, by my count, Democrats this cycle have had 27.</p>\n<p> TWENTY-SEVEN is a lot for a party that ended up holding no nomination contests in 1996 and 2012 and had only two serious candidates in 2000, 2008 and 2016, when no incumbent was running. Apparently, many Democratic politicos reasoned that if an oddball like Donald Trump can get elected, why can&rsquo;t they?<br />\n In any case, the two parties, in line with longstanding differences in their basic character, generated quite different fields of candidates.<br />\n The 16 Republicans who lost their party&rsquo;s nomination to Donald Trump were heavily tilted toward governors and large constituencies. They included nine current or former governors, only five incumbent or former U.S. senators, and no incumbent congressmen (though four had served in the House). Just three &mdash; Trump, Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina &mdash; had never won public office.<br />\n Statewide Republican victories during the Obama presidency, in 2010, 2012 and 2014, had generated many Republican winners who were plausible national candidates. Six of these 16 Republicans came from the four most populous states (California, Texas, Florida, New York), where they had won a total of 12 statewide elections, three in hypermarginal Florida. The smallest state where any of them had run was Arkansas, which ranks 33 out of 50 in population.<br />\n Six of these candidates came from politically marginal states and four from heavily Democratic states. Only six hailed from safe Republican states. This was a group of candidates seasoned in competitive general elections in large constituencies.<br />\n That&rsquo;s a vivid contrast with the group of 2019-20 Democratic candidates. Of the 27 current or former candidates I&rsquo;ve counted, only four come from &ldquo;purple&rdquo; states that have been marginal in recent presidential elections. One, former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper, has dropped out to run for the Senate. Another, former Pennsylvania Rep. Joe Sestak, looks like a long shot. Conservative columnist George Will hopes that the two others, Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet and Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar, will become top-tier competitors, but so far, Democratic primary voters haven&rsquo;t taken his wise advice &mdash; and they may be bogged down next year in a Senate impeachment trial.<br />\n The most noticeable thing about the Democratic field is that it&rsquo;s heavily weighted toward those with congressional service who were elected from safe Democratic (and, in some cases, tiny) states. Only three served as governors: Hickenlooper and Washington&rsquo;s Jay Inslee, who have already dropped out, and Steve Bullock of (3 electoral vote) Montana.</p>\n<p> SEVEN OF the Democratic candidates are current U.S. senators, and two are former senators: Joe Biden, who served from 1972 to 2008 in tiny Delaware, and dropout Mike Gravel, elected in 1968 and 1974 in Alaska. Another seven have served or serve in the House.<br />\n Much of these candidates&rsquo; service came when Republicans were in the majority, which makes it hard for a Democrat, especially in the House, to compile a distinguished or even distinctive legislative record. I think it&rsquo;s fair to say that none of them has done so, with the conspicuous exception of Biden. Democrats held majorities during most of his Senate years, but his substantive record on past issues, from school busing to bankruptcy, rubs many contemporary Democrats the wrong way.<br />\n Six Democratic candidates are current or former mayors. The one from the biggest city, New York&rsquo;s Bill de Blasio, dropped out after getting zero support. Julian Castro, former (part-time) mayor of San Antonio, and Wayne Messam, mayor of Miami suburb Miramar, haven&rsquo;t done much better. Only Mayor Pete Buttigieg, from tiny (population 101,860) South Bend, Indiana, seems like a possible contender.<br />\n &nbsp;Three Democratic private sector types from California are running &mdash; billionaire former hedge fund executive Tom Steyer, Silicon Valley denizen Andrew Yang and motivational speaker Marian Williamson &mdash; and may strike a chord in the primaries. But none of them look well-positioned to win back the blue-collar Midwesterners who spurned Hillary Clinton for Donald Trump.</p>\n<p> THE 2016 Republican field was full of candidates who showed they could win tough general elections but weren&rsquo;t so tested in Republican primaries. Most 2020 Democrats have a different problem: minimal vote-getting experience beyond the Democratic cocoon of densely packed central cities, sympathetic suburbs and university towns. It&rsquo;s a predictable problem for a party that didn&rsquo;t win many offices beyond that cocoon in the Obama years.</p>\n<p> Michael Barone is a senior political analyst for the Washington Examiner, resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and longtime co-author of The Almanac of American Politics.</p>\n', created = 1575888933, expire = 1575975333, headers = '', serialized = 0 WHERE cid = '2:e9941fd406b10cdef37bca807fa723b9' in /home/conserva/public_html/includes/cache.inc on line 112.
  • user warning: Table './conserva_drupal/cache_filter' is marked as crashed and should be repaired query: SELECT data, created, headers, expire, serialized FROM cache_filter WHERE cid = '2:816bc0191af06f0f4e6d356dcbeec150' in /home/conserva/public_html/includes/cache.inc on line 27.
  • user warning: Table './conserva_drupal/cache_filter' is marked as crashed and should be repaired query: UPDATE cache_filter SET data = '<p>BRITISH ELECTION: November 1, 2019</p>\n<p><img alt=\"\" src=\"http://www.conservativechronicle.com/sites/default/files/Barone.gif\" style=\"width: 300px; height: 116px;\" /></p>\n<p>It has been 1,225 days since an all-time-high turnout of British voters chose, by a 52 to 48% margin, to Leave rather than Remain in the European Union. Now with a general election set for Dec. 12, it looks like Britain is finally about to escape the EU&rsquo;s &ldquo;ever closer union.&rdquo;</p>\n<p> THE ISSUE is unfamiliar to most Americans, yet the cleavages it has caused closely resemble our own. American foreign policy elites have long encouraged European unity, on the sentimental principle that it worked well for us in 1776 or the long-obsolete argument that it would prevent another cataclysmic war between Germany and France.<br />\n But, as Charles de Gaulle argued when he vetoed British accession to what was then the European Economic Community in 1963, Britain and Europe are not a good fit. European law is built on general principles enunciated in its Napoleonic codes; English common law is built on an accretion of decisions in specific cases. De Gaulle explained: &ldquo;England in effect is insular, she is maritime, she is linked through her exchanges, her markets, her supply lines to the most diverse and often the most distant countries.&rdquo;<br />\n Nonetheless, Britain joined the EU in the 1970s, when it was in the economic doldrums and Europe seemed more modern and dynamic. Since the Margaret Thatcher revolution of the 1980s, Britain has surged ahead economically and Europe has sunk into slow growth. And Britons have increasingly bridled against getting their laws from a politically unaccountable bureaucracy in Brussels.<br />\n Anti-EU feeling welled up in the Conservative Party. Facing defections to Nigel Farage&rsquo;s anti-EU party, which won 13% of popular votes in 2015, Conservative then-Prime Minister David Cameron promised a referendum on EU membership. It was held in June 2016, and most major institutions &mdash; the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democratic parties; the BBC and most newspapers; the London financial community; veteran civil servants &mdash; supported Remain and assumed it would win.<br />\n Oops. Metropolitan London and ethnically distinctive Scotland and Northern Ireland voted Remain, but the rest of England &mdash; 70% of the nation &mdash; voted 53% Leave. The metropolis versus the heartland: the same cleavage that elected Donald Trump five months later.<br />\n What followed were a series of blunders and self-righteous sabotage. Cameron&rsquo;s successor, Theresa May, a Remain supporter, knuckled under to EU demands and called a 2017 snap election that cost Conservatives their majority. Her withdrawal agreements were voted down three times by the House of Commons.<br />\n After she extended the March 29 deadline for leaving the EU, in the polls the Conservative Party fell behind Labour and its left-wing, anti-Semitic leader, Jeremy Corbyn. She resigned, and in July, the colorful former London Mayor Boris Johnson became prime minister.<br />\n Instantly, Conservatives zoomed ahead of Labour in polls. Johnson was dismissed as a buffoon by establishment press, and an odd-duck coalition of Conservative Remainers, Lib Dems and Labour &mdash; with the help of Speaker John Bercow, who abandoned the position&rsquo;s neutrality &mdash; seized control of Parliament&rsquo;s agenda. Astonishingly, former Prime Ministers Tony Blair and John Major endorsed this contempt for voters they dismissed as bigoted and ignorant. You only get respect if you vote their way.</p>\n<p> NEVERTHELESS Johnson, by threatening to leave without an EU agreement, managed to negotiate one and now has delivered the general election Labour was blocking. Current polling has Conservatives leading Labour 35 to 25%, with the newly formed Brexit Party at 11%.<br />\n Cautious British analysts warn that in 2017, Conservatives had a similar lead and blew it after the supposedly &ldquo;strong and stable&rdquo; May abandoned an ill-advised estate tax increase. The Brexit Party could take hardcore Leavers away from Conservatives. Labour and Lib Dem Remainers could defer to one party or the other to maximize the anti-Johnson vote in different constituencies. In Britain, as here, recent election results have made election prediction hazardous.<br />\n All that said, some things seem clear. The Conservative Party, having already lost upscale voters in high-income, high-education metro London and university towns, is aiming at making gains in downscale Midlands and constituencies north of England. Johnson is also abandoning Cameron&rsquo;s economic austerity with promises to increase health and police spending.</p>\n<p> PSEPHOLOGICALLY inclined Americans will recognize this pattern. Results depend, however, on the political skills of the partisan players. If Boris Johnson gets the big parliamentary majority suggested by the polls, he will prove to be the most adept outmaneuverer of a hostile House of Commons since William Pitt the Younger in the 18th century and the most creative forger of one-nation conservatism since Benjamin Disraeli in the 19th. Impressive.</p>\n<p> Michael Barone is a senior political analyst for the Washington Examiner, resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and longtime co-author of The Almanac of American Politics.</p>\n', created = 1575888933, expire = 1575975333, headers = '', serialized = 0 WHERE cid = '2:816bc0191af06f0f4e6d356dcbeec150' in /home/conserva/public_html/includes/cache.inc on line 112.
  • user warning: Table './conserva_drupal/cache_filter' is marked as crashed and should be repaired query: SELECT data, created, headers, expire, serialized FROM cache_filter WHERE cid = '2:81522cd903a0426a87c718fb6d1d9ce9' in /home/conserva/public_html/includes/cache.inc on line 27.
  • user warning: Table './conserva_drupal/cache_filter' is marked as crashed and should be repaired query: UPDATE cache_filter SET data = '<p>POLITICAL PARTIES: October 25, 2019</p>\n<p><img alt=\"\" src=\"http://www.conservativechronicle.com/sites/default/files/Barone.gif\" style=\"width: 300px; height: 116px;\" /></p>\n<p>Political parties, and their travails, have been much on my mind recently as I&rsquo;ve been speaking to radio and television interviewers about my new book, &ldquo;How America&rsquo;s Political Parties Change (And How They Don&rsquo;t).&rdquo;</p>\n<p> THE BOOK thesis is that our two parties, founded in 1832 and 1854, have often changed positions on issues but have retained their basic character in a nation that has expanded from 25 million people to almost 330 million.<br />\n The Republican Party has always been centered around a constituency of people thought of as typical Americans who are not by themselves a majority. The Democratic Party has always been a coalition of disparate peoples not considered typical Americans but who, when they stick together, can form a majority.<br />\n Last week I wrote about the Democratic Party&rsquo;s travails, as its latest presidential debate revealed sharp disagreements between different groups in the Democratic coalition. Much of the discord arises from the emergence of affluent white college graduates &mdash; gentry liberals &mdash; as the dominant force in both raising money and generating ideas.<br />\n Republicans&rsquo; travails arise also from the changing character in their core constituency. From the Eisenhower years to the Reagan years, it was centered on the relatively affluent. Since the 1990s, it has been changing, tilting more toward the religiously devout and economically downscale.<br />\n That change, as Ernest Hemingway said of bankruptcy, happened first gradually and then suddenly, starting with the baby-boom tussles of Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich and then climaxing in the baby-boom Armageddon between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.<br />\n With his distinctive positions on trade and immigration, candidate Trump increased Republican percentages from non-college-graduate whites and captured 100 more electoral votes than Mitt Romney did as the nominee in 2012. This downscale Republican Party supports President Trump even more steadfastly than 1970s Republicans supported Richard Nixon.<br />\n But a downscale party attracts articulate attackers and lacks institutional support. That&rsquo;s true of Donald Trump&rsquo;s Republicans and, across the Atlantic, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson&rsquo;s Conservatives, as Johnson struggles to implement Brexit, the solemn June 2016 verdict of the British electorate to leave the European Union.<br />\n Brexit was opposed by elites and minorities in metro London, Scotland and Northern Ireland but was supported by 57% of voters in England outside London, which is 70% of the UK. Similarly, Hillary Clinton beat Trump 65 to 30% in metro New York, Washington, Los Angeles and San Francisco. But he carried the other 85% of the country by a 49-45% margin.<br />\n Downscale parties tend to have few champions among the chattering classes. In Britain, most of the print presses and the BBC, the latter of which every TV owner is forced to subsidize, heap ridicule and scorn on Brexit and its supporters. The financial elite and entertainment celebrities take a similar view.</p>\n<p> IN AMERICA, the former reality TV celebrity who got scads of cable TV coverage while contesting Republican primaries now gets unmixed negative coverage from all but Fox News and is opposed by just about every newspaper editorial page.<br />\n Disdain for downscale parties is nothing new. Sixty years ago, when the Democratic Party was dominated by Southern whites and Northern factory workers, major newsmagazines and newspapers were complacently Republican and snidely condescending about Democrats. Arthur Schlesinger Jr.&rsquo;s 1940s and 1950s writings are laced with a defensive awareness of articulate readers&rsquo; disdain for the Democratic Party that corresponds to many conservative writes&rsquo; attitudes today.<br />\n What&rsquo;s new is the downscale party&rsquo;s detractors&rsquo; willingness to challenge the legitimacy of its victories &mdash; something Richard Nixon and Al Gore refused to do in 1960 and 2000 &mdash; and, even more, their sense of self-righteousness in the notion of overturning an election result. Brexit opponents in Britain brush aside 17.4 million Brexit voters as bigots or ignoramuses entitled to zero respect.&nbsp;<br />\n American intelligence and law enforcement personnel felt morally justified in using official powers of the Clinton campaign-purchased Steele dossier to advance the baseless Trump-Russia collusion charge. Democrats now seek to impeach Trump for his phone conversation with the Ukrainian president and for having overturned an established foreign policy.<br />\n Actually, the Constitution vests the &ldquo;executive power in the president and doesn&rsquo;t mention the State Department. Past presidents have often sent personal envoys on politically sensitive missions &mdash; Franklin Roosevelt sent Harry Hopkins to Winston Churchill; Richard Nixon sent Henry Kissinger to Mao Zedong.</p>\n<p> THERE ARE signs that the people resist &ldquo;the Resistance.&rdquo; Boris Johnson&rsquo;s Conservatives are well ahead in polls, and the leading Democratic presidential candidates have shown weaknesses that may trump Trump&rsquo;s. As Arthur Schlesinger liked to remind smug Republicans, Franklin Roosevelt&rsquo;s downscale Democrats did win five straight presidential elections.</p>\n<p> Michael Barone is a senior political analyst for the Washington Examiner, resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and longtime co-author of The Almanac of American Politics.</p>\n', created = 1575888933, expire = 1575975333, headers = '', serialized = 0 WHERE cid = '2:81522cd903a0426a87c718fb6d1d9ce9' in /home/conserva/public_html/includes/cache.inc on line 112.
  • user warning: Table './conserva_drupal/cache_filter' is marked as crashed and should be repaired query: SELECT data, created, headers, expire, serialized FROM cache_filter WHERE cid = '2:1cd77f7184da2bafaa6a089469bc2384' in /home/conserva/public_html/includes/cache.inc on line 27.
  • user warning: Table './conserva_drupal/cache_filter' is marked as crashed and should be repaired query: UPDATE cache_filter SET data = '<div id=\"fb-root\"></div>\n<script>(function(d, s, id) {\n var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];\n if (d.getElementById(id)) return;\n js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;\n js.src = \"//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1&appId=452921018151594\";\n fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);\n}(document, \'script\', \'facebook-jssdk\'));</script><div class=\"fb-like-box\" data-href=\"http://www.facebook.com/conservativechronicle\" data-width=\"275\" data-colorscheme=\"light\" data-show-faces=\"true\" data-header=\"true\" data-stream=\"false\" data-show-border=\"true\"></div>\n', created = 1575888933, expire = 1575975333, headers = '', serialized = 0 WHERE cid = '2:1cd77f7184da2bafaa6a089469bc2384' in /home/conserva/public_html/includes/cache.inc on line 112.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/conserva/public_html/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • user warning: Table './conserva_drupal/cache_filter' is marked as crashed and should be repaired query: SELECT data, created, headers, expire, serialized FROM cache_filter WHERE cid = '5:26776aa5ca60f6f8eb4e7f92178ff26e' in /home/conserva/public_html/includes/cache.inc on line 27.

Michael Barone

11/30/2019 - 10:11pm
FAIRNESS: November 29, 2019 It’s Thanksgiving week in a country whose warring political tribes are not much inclined to giving thanks. But any American with a reasonable historic perspective can easily find reasons to do so. FOR ONE thing, it’s clear that we are a much fairer nation than we were in the past. Women, black Americans, immigrants and minorities of any perceptible kind...
11/23/2019 - 1:14am
TRUMP PRESIDENCY: November 22, 2019 “The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-Events in America” is the title of a 1960s book by historian and librarian of Congress Daniel Boorstin. Pseudo-events, he wrote, are staged solely to generate news media coverage. Real events involve independent actors and have unpredictable outcomes. Pseudo-events are...
11/18/2019 - 12:24am
2020 ELECTION: November 15, 2019 Michael Bloomberg has delivered his latest delicious hint about running for president. Former Attorney General Eric Holder is fresh from taking credit for the new Democratic legislative majorities in Virginia, making it known he might be interested. And former Gov. Deval Patrick joined the presidential race after...
11/09/2019 - 11:43pm
2020 ELECTION: November 8, 2019 Have you noticed that the two parties’ fields of presidential candidates have, in the past two election cycles, grown enormously larger than (if not necessarily superior to) those in past years? Where parties used to have two to five serious candidates to choose from, Republicans had 17 in 2016, and, by my...
11/02/2019 - 3:18pm
BRITISH ELECTION: November 1, 2019 It has been 1,225 days since an all-time-high turnout of British voters chose, by a 52 to 48% margin, to Leave rather than Remain in the European Union. Now with a general election set for Dec. 12, it looks like Britain is finally about to escape the EU’s “ever closer union.” THE ISSUE is...
10/28/2019 - 11:18pm
POLITICAL PARTIES: October 25, 2019 Political parties, and their travails, have been much on my mind recently as I’ve been speaking to radio and television interviewers about my new book, “How America’s Political Parties Change (And How They Don’t).” THE BOOK thesis is that our two parties, founded in 1832 and 1854...
Syndicate content