After the Hindenburgian failure of the Wisconsin recall, I don't think it's a stretch to say liberalism is in danger. The real test will be 2012. If Romney wins, which seems very likely barring some economic miracle, liberals will lose much of their political clout at the Federal level. It's very likely that the GOP holds the house and takes the Senate, and some of the older guard liberal SCOTUS justices will probably retire and/or pass on between 2013 and 2016, creating a conservative majority at the SCOTUS and hopefully further shifting power back to the states.

As far as liberal bias in the media, the MSM is losing its monopoly on information, thanks to the internet. Eventually, informed people will only turn to the MSM for basic information on what's going on, and turn to the internet for further information. Under these ciThe only stronghold that liberalism will have is academia, and even there, as people turn away from the soft sciences and humanities, towards more substantial courses that have a future, I can see liberalism's power waning within 15-20 years.

Granted, this is mostly wishful thinking on my part, but I get the sense that the national tide is really turning.

Not wishful CL, just truthful.
I've been predicting the demise of liberalism for the next three decades, an entire generation will have to emerge before they can once again try and fool the people into believing socialism works.

Quote from: Solar on June 06, 2012, 07:08:58 AM
Not wishful CL, just truthful.
I've been predicting the demise of liberalism for the next three decades, an entire generation will have to emerge before they can once again try and fool the people into believing socialism works.

I imagine the education/academic system will be the toughest nut to crack, but with there being less demand for traditionally liberal degrees (sociology, "minority studies", etc.), I think liberalism will weaken eventually even on that front.

Quote from: CubaLibre on June 06, 2012, 07:29:48 AM
I imagine the education/academic system will be the toughest nut to crack, but with there being less demand for traditionally liberal degrees (sociology, "minority studies", etc.), I think liberalism will weaken eventually even on that front.

That's a good point and it shows that we have our work cut out for us to make positions that require those classes, completely worthless.

I was just listening to Ed Driscoll interviewing R. Emmett Tyrell, whose new book is called The Death Of Liberalism. (Catchy title, eh?) Tyrell believes that liberalism in the classic sense died in 2008 when Dear Leader -- who is not in any way a liberal, but a statist/socialist -- was elected. Tyrell foresees a time in the near future when the Democrats drop all pretense of being "liberal" or even "progressive," and simply openly admit that they are in fact statists and socialists, the party of Big Government and Big Spending and Big Taxes. They are today perilously close (perilously for the rest of us) to having literally purchased the votes of half of the American electorate.

One of the more interesting illustrations Tyrell used to show the decline of liberalism was the career of Hubert Humphrey. Always a liberal -- in Tyrell's view a "good" liberal -- Humphrey was consider "too liberal" for national office in 1948, the year Truman was elected president. By 1972, still running for president, Humphrey was overwhelmed by what his party had become -- a party that could stand behind the likes of George McGovern.

As a 24 year old young man who makes his money online, let me say:

The educational system will wither. Thousands of men my age are realizing that they can simply stop being a part of the system.  THe few men left who still think a college degree is useful will get STEM degrees.  The only people left in the liberal arts fields and massively left-indoctrinating degrees will be women. 

Being as women aren't providers they wont be funding the majority of their own eduction - they will rely on loans and grants.  Eventually when the right takes hold, the government will cut down grants, and the women will be skittish about taking loans, and the enrollment numbers will dwindle. 

Liberal education, simply by lack of support, will wither.

In short, without any offense to the female membership of this forum, whom I admire, the liberal educational complex will become a matriarchy, and matriarchies simply fail.

Quote from: The Boss on June 06, 2012, 07:40:57 AM
As a 24 year old young man who makes his money online, let me say:

The educational system will wither. Thousands of men my age are realizing that they can simply stop being a part of the system.  THe few men left who still think a college degree is useful will get STEM degrees.  The only people left in the liberal arts fields and massively left-indoctrinating degrees will be women. 

Being as women aren't providers they wont be funding the majority of their own eduction - they will rely on loans and grants.  Eventually when the right takes hold, the government will cut down grants, and the women will be skittish about taking loans, and the enrollment numbers will dwindle. 

Liberal education, simply by lack of support, will wither.

In short, without any offense to the female membership of this forum, whom I admire, the liberal educational complex will become a matriarchy, and matriarchies simply fail.

LOL, well aside from your large dose of misogyny I agree that the days are numbered on education as we know it...

As for the future of liberalism here's today's daily serving of what passes for enlightenment in the land of fruits, nuts and rollerblades...

SACRAMENTO — State lawmakers have advanced measures that would institute the country's first ban on gay "conversion" therapy for minors, regulate the state's booming medical marijuana industry and bar legislators from accepting spa treatments, golf outings, concert tickets and some other gifts from special interests.

Legislators also are seeking to make college more affordable, passing separate bills that would give students free access to popular textbooks online and establish a scholarship program for middle-class Californians whose families make less than $150,000 a year.

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jun/01/local/la-me-legislature-20120601

Quote from: Chuckerbuddy on June 06, 2012, 08:14:56 AM
LOL, well aside from your large dose of misogyny

No misogyny there. The truth is the liberal arts fields are mostly populated by women (in fact, women now outnumber men in higher learning establishments) and the truth is that women are more likely than men to outsource their debt in the form of loans and grants.

Once the grants get cut, they will be reluctant to take on more debt than they can swallow (note I'm calling them intelligent, anti-misogynistic) and the system will wither because men will have dropped out in droves and the university wont have their loan or self-pay money to pick up the slack.

It's also true that matriarchies - as historical rule - fail.

It has nothing to do with gender equality, and the fact that the only difference between me and a woman is a penis - it has everything to do with the purposes for which we were built.

Men in women are made for different things. And men are the gender that build things.

Now, if you can, point out where and how I was a 'misogynist'.

LOL - Hey fella, if you want to call that rant something other than a misogynistic card stacking of 'facts', go right ahead. How you keep your women in place is your business. (Not sure you know what 'liberal arts' means...hint, it's got nothing to so with liberalism as a political movement.)

As far as the future of liberalism goes, it will always have a wide appeal if the Right continues to offer a safe haven for bigotry.

Quote from: Chuckerbuddy on June 06, 2012, 09:25:25 AM
LOL - Hey fella, if you want to call that rant something other than a misogynistic card stacking of 'facts', go right ahead. How you keep your women in place is your business. (Not sure you know what 'liberal arts' means...hint, it's got nothing to so with liberalism as a political movement.)

As far as the future of liberalism goes, it will always have a wide appeal if the Right continues to offer a safe haven for bigotry.

Relax CB, what he said was not misogynistic, but rather an observation on his part.
I don't think anyone would glean a hatred for women from his comment.

I'm always relaxed man...

But making up 'facts' so as to lead to a conclusion that women are less capable of running a society is misogynistic, whether you want to admit it or not. It's time for the conservative movement to distance itself from the crazies...

Quote from: Chuckerbuddy on June 06, 2012, 10:04:20 AM
I'm always relaxed man...

But making up 'facts' so as to lead to a conclusion that women are less capable of running a society is misogynistic, whether you want to admit it or not. It's time for the conservative movement to distance itself from the crazies...

He didn't say anything remotely close...

Yeah he did.

"Being as women aren't providers they wont be funding the majority of their own eduction..the liberal educational complex will become a matriarchy, and matriarchies simply fail."

A lot of woman are providers. Some are sole providers. And no matriarchies do not 'simply fail'.

Quote from: Chuckerbuddy on June 06, 2012, 10:10:58 AM
Yeah he did.

"Being as women aren't providers they wont be funding the majority of their own eduction..the liberal educational complex will become a matriarchy, and matriarchies simply fail."

A lot of woman are providers. Some are sole providers. And no matriarchies do not 'simply fail'.

Men, by nature, are the providers.  There are a lot of women who provide, yes, but he was speaking in general.

No you're right and I was wrong. Matriarchies are wildly successful.  That's why so many powerful, first world countries are run almost exclusively by women and why you can name so many powerful, wealthy matriarchal societies from history.

Oh.. wait...

And if I could: How many women are sole providers without any type of alimony or government assistance vs the number of home with an entire family where the dad is the sole provider and the mom stays at home?

I'm not saying men are better than women (THAT'S misogyny), I'm saying that we have different strengths and women simply wont be able to support the educational system that is being built right now.

As for my made up facts:

Quick Google search...
Undergrad loan stats...

AS for not knowing what liberal arts are:

Liberal arts degrees are typically classified as degrees that do not relate to work. Degrees such as political science, philosophy, and women's studies.  Also in this field a lot of degrees like psychology and business administration.   

Liberal arts degrees are contrasted by STEM degrees (science, technology, engineering, math). 

Liberal arts degrees have a higher female enrollment.  Liberal arts degrees also happen to be the degrees with courses and professors who don't focus on teach material, but rather on "socratic" thinking and discussion - the types of classes where you get lectured at about the 'gender wage gap' myth and about how profit is bad and medicine should be socialized.

The names are coincidental, but liberal arts degrees tend to be populated by politically liberal professors who want to indoctrinate their students into their world view.

So yes, I do know what liberal arts degrees are.  Also: Way to proceed to mock me and use shaming language (leftist debate tactic) instead of actually finding and pointing out any misogyny or factual flaws in my argument.