How Full of it is David Brooks?

Quite a bit, I think. He has a column for NYT suggesting that Democrats versus Republicans is really just one elite challenging another, so working-class programs will never get enacted.

Professionals, like lawyers and media types, tend to vote and give Democratic.

...Amazingly, Democrats have cultivated this donor base while trending populist on trade by forsaking much of the Clinton Third Way approach and by vowing to raise taxes on capital gains and the wealthy. If Obama’s tax plans go through, those affluent donors could wind up giving over 50 percent of their income to the federal government.

They’ve managed to clear these policy hurdles partly by looking out for tort lawyers and other special groups. But mostly they have taken advantage of the rivalry between the two American elites.

...If the Democrats are elected, this highly educated class will have much more say over policy than during the campaign. Undecided voters sway campaigns, but in government, elites generally run things. Once the Republicans are vanquished, I wouldn’t hold your breath waiting for that capital gains tax hike or serious measures to expand unionization.

Completely impossible, I suppose, that the Democratic professionals Brooks talks about could actually believe in any of the programs he says won't be enacted. It's funny really , because Brooks is taking a page right of the ultra-leftist handbook - the whole society is controlled by a bunch of plutocrats, and thus it really doesn't matter who is in power. I guess right about now that might be his best argument for keeping Republicans.