THE FRUITS OF VANGUARDISM. Daniel Drezner looks at Democratic efforts to come up with some bumper-sticker issues of their own, as a counterpoint to Republican themes that can be put rather simply, such as "Cut Taxes." "Deregulate." "Beat the Commies." (Oh, that last one has been accomplished.) Such efforts would be welcome. The usual "our positions are more principled and nuanced" stuff is unlikely to work very well. As Andrew Sullivan notes, such posturing is likely to antagonize potential voters, a point Linda McQuaig misses. Best of the Web finds much to criticize in the mindset. Newmark's Door notes the likely outcome of vanguardism. (I hesitate to comment further on the scrap between the Angry Left and the Triumphant Right over who is more stupid. If that's what you're after go here or here or here or here.)

It is not to the name-calling that I wish to speak. I suspect there are as many deep thinkers on the Right side of issues (or pick any other stratification you want) as there are on the Left. Accordingly, a debate on the meaning and effectiveness of the bumper sticker slogans (let's call them Big Ideas) is likely to be more useful than any number of snarks about the moral consistency or intelligence of advocates of particular positions. One good place to start is with this essay about the effectiveness of tax rate cuts. Key paragraph: "Democrats have lost faith in Keynesian-type fiscal stimulus, and are instead worried about the effects of deficits and a growing debt on future spending programs. Republicans, on the other hand, appear to be favoring a fiscal stimulus, but they are mainly trying to limit future spending on entitlement and other programs favored by Democrats." Plenty of room for serious debate about serious economics right there. As I noted here, both major parties (not to mention the minor parties) have erred on the side of hype and spin in selling their messages. I'd like to see better.