wretchard, you seen to credit this structuralist litcrit gibberish. now, I like structuralist litcrit gibberish as well as the next guy, and on a hot summer day I might go full bore pomo on you at any moment. But, politically, I think this is nothing but hoohah.

Gosh, was it only 2004 when linguist George Lakoff started in on this theme, that if the left just used better keywords, images, similies, homilies, then their ideas would win in debate?

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/results.asp?TTL=&ATH=george+lakoff&WRD=&PRC=&FMT=&AGE=&USRI=1&CID=&PBL=

I used to like Lakoff, before that.

WHAT IF the problem with the left is that their ideas are incoherent and unworkable and on even cursory inspection any rational and politically neutral person would reject them?

WHAT IF maybe 1/3 of the electorate is simply against anything that is proposed, good or bad?

It simply comes down to the left, far more than the right, believes they should – SHOULD – impose their superior ideas on the hoi polloi for the universal and transcendent good. OK, on the right there is a small element of crazed religious types, but that’s a religious position, not a political one.

I don’t think the right’s use of new tech is magical, I think it just facilitates a contentful discussion, and when that happens, the left loses.