Wishful thinking

I would consider myself an idealist when it comes to politics.  I tend to believe that government is about more than protecting those in power.  With that said, I understand the opposite view that cynics and conservatives embrace, which is that government is inherently flawed and acts only to protect itself, rather than serving the people.  The election next week will help determine whether idealism or cynicism dominates our political discussion for the next two years.  It will help determine whether my beliefs are wishful thinking, or a reality we can believe in.  

David Brooks' column this week takes a few potshots at Democratic officials whom he accuses of engaging in wishful thinking.  He argues that they are to blame for their own problems, rather than the other side.  While it is true that the Democrats probably underestimated the extent of Americans' real fears and anger, I don't think they're quite as naive as Mr. Brooks portrays them.  In fact, I think they were more calculating than they should have been, more fearful than overreaching, more concerned with protecting their own power than with really making things better.  If we had a perfectly progressive Congress -- with more than 60 votes in the Senate 100% behind health care reform, for example -- the Democrats would not have looked quite as bad as they did in the summer of 2009.  The torturous legislative process and the real fear and anger expressed at town halls last year, coupled with a campaign to stoke fears and exaggerate the dangers of change, have produced our current electorate.  I do think that many people are misinformed on a variety of issues, but maybe Mr. Brooks is right, and the conservative vote is more thoughtful and well-informed than they have been portrayed as being.  After all, rational people can reach opposite conclusions from the same set of facts.  Still, I wonder if the Republican vote this year is more emotional than rational.  It may be Mr. Brooks who is doing the wishful thinking.