There is palpable triumphalism on the left these days, and it is very much in evidence with Arianna Huffington’s and Eric Alterman’s latest assaults on all things Republican. Ms. Huffington’s “Right Is Wrong” has a kind of Chatty Kathy blogosphere tone to it that will delight the devotees of her Huffington Post. Mr. Alterman’s “Why We’re Liberals” is a far more serious, if deeply familiar, slog through the political traditions and principles that make Mr. Alterman so proud of himself.

Before she became a pundit, Ms. Huffington was a biographer of some distinction with smart, if idiosyncratic, volumes on Picasso and Maria Callas. Then her husband, a wealthy Republican, left her, and she left the Republican Party and transformed herself into a diva of the Beverly Hills left. Her last book, “On Becoming Fearless … in Love, Work and Life,” was, uh, more art of living than art of politics. But the one constant in her recent work is that the ultimate subject is herself; it’s always and in all ways about Arianna. Sound a little bit like the last Democratic president? Except that when Bill Clinton was in the White House, Ms. Huffington wrote a satire entitled “Greetings from the Lincoln Bedroom,” in which one of her sex gags involved the president’s “Achilles Penis.” Well, that was then and this is now.

With her backstory, it is incumbent that Ms. Huffington do a little explaining. And on page eight of “Right is Wrong,” she does:

People often ask me what caused me to change course so radically. In truth, my “conversion” wasn’t as dramatic as it might have appeared. On all the so-called values issues – abortion, gun control, gay rights – I have the exact same progressive positions that I’ve always had.

The biggest shift in my thinking has been in how I view the role of government. I used to believe that the private sector would address the problems of those in need. But then I saw firsthand – up close and very personal – that this wasn’t going to happen.

Judging from the rest of this book, the role of government will be larger indeed in Arianna’s World: health care, energy subsidies for everything renewable (remember when ethanol was a great idea?), and unspecified but presumably elaborate plans for helping the needy. Like those batteries required to operate some appliances, cost estimates are not included.

But then, this is not really a book about public policy or ideas. It is firstly an attack on the Bush Administration and secondly an attack on the mainstream press, which she clearly despises. Since the material on Mr. Bush is familiar and a bit tired, she gets far more juiced with the press. In a chapter entitled “The Media: Equal Time for Lies,” she bemoans the tendency to air both sides of every argument, especially when she is convinced that her side of the argument is right or, rather, correct.

She has a special disregard for Tim Russert, whom she refers to as “EZ Pass.” She reserves the lowest rung in hell, however, for Bob Woodward. “If the media had a face — confident, clubby, clinging to half-truths, and, above all, safeguarding their own cherished ‘access’ — it would have to be Bob Woodward’s,” she writes.

Unlike Ms. Huffington, who clings to the Obama Talking Points by repeatedly referring to her newfound politics as “progressive,” Mr. Alterman is a proud and unashamed liberal. The main point of his latest book is that the Democratic Party will have lost its soul, as well as its mojo, if it abandons the L-word. Indeed, “Why We’re Liberals” is one long rant against what he believes to be the caricature of liberals and liberalism. Chief responsibility for this calumny belongs to conservatives, Mr. Alterman believes, beginning with Richard Nixon and his 1972 reference to his political opposition as favoring three A’s — Acid, Amnesty, and Abortion.

But Mr. Alterman, who previously wrote the best-selling “What Liberal Media?,” also has a major bone to pick with the press. Where the material is clearly labeled as opinion, Mr. Alterman suggests, conservatives have begun to dominate, but where the material is transmitted as “news,” it is still shaped by a world outlook that is decidedly liberal.

But Mr. Alterman’s book is not simply a piece of press criticism. He offers some solid advice for Democrats on the construction of a bigger ideological tent. Along with a growing number of people on the left, he believes liberals need to reach out to “Reagan Democrats” who might disagree with party orthodoxy on abortion, gun control, gay marriage, and the like. Judging from the kind of pro-life, pro-gun, and even pro-war candidates who were elected recently in previously Republican congressional districts, Democrats have been listening.

More than originality of critique or boldness of prescription, what finally distinguishes these two books is a heightened sense of partisanship. In the end, like the liberal Internet culture that has fostered them, they are both more about winning elections than promulgating ideas. Thus, Ms. Huffington assails Republicans on immigration but is stone silent on Democratic pandering regarding the deeply entwined matter of free trade with Mexico. Mr. Alterman assails Mr. Bush on Social Security reform, but provides no real guidance on the correct way forward. The liberal Establishment is undeniably flexing its electoral muscles, but the animating ideas are still in painfully short supply.

Mr. Willcox, a former editor in chief of Reader’s Digest, lives in Ridgefield, Conn.