There is, however, a tremendous disconnect between what people are concerned about and what Washington--and the media--seem to think is important."
I like the Democrats' chances in that mental framework. We win on the issues, as Steve Benen notes in shooting down calls for a "centrist" (sic) third party:
And what would be better than "pretty good"? A more ambitious health care policy that conservatives blocked; a more ambitious stimulus that conservatives opposed; a comprehensive energy/climate package that conservatives killed; more crack downs on Wall Street that conservatives have vowed to fight; and an education reform agenda that the president has already launched.
In other words, Friedman has effectively endorsed the entirety of President Obama's agenda, most of which has passed, can't pass, or has to be severely watered down because of unprecedented Senate obstructionism. But instead of calling for reforming the legislative process, or calling on Republicans to start playing a constructive role in policymaking, or calling on voters to elect more candidates who agree with the agenda the columnist espouses, Friedman says what we really need is an amorphous third party that will think the way he does.
"...the GOP may have peaked too early. Taking a victory dance in August may have felt good for them, but it also forced voters to consider the fact that this November they will face a choice between Democrats and Republicans, and a vote for a Republican means turning back to the way things were under Bush -- or worse."I like the Dems' oddss in that mental framework too.