 |
 |
|
NOVEMBER 25, 2007: DEMOCRATS EXCITED-
FINALLY READY TO RUN AGAINST BUSH-
IN 2008!
Many of my Democratic friends are feeling smug these days- Bush's ratings continue to sit in the cellar, people are disgruntled with the Iraq War and the economy, and finally appear to have tired of Bush's autocratic and confrontational style, not to mention his surrounding himself with extremists and corrupt appointees. They also note that the Republican candidates for President in 2008 are still struggling to find a front-runner, and none of the candidates seem to have an enthusiastic endorsement among the Bush core constituencies. But they seem to forget- Bush is not running next time, and 2008 is different than 2004.
A recent pair of Newsweek columns showed the contrasting strategies between Democrats and Republicans. Blogger Kos said Democrats will win by running against the Bush record. Rove said Republicans will win by voicing their core values, to contrast with the presumptive Democratic nominee (Hillary Clinton), whom he characterizes as cold, harsh and brittle. For once I agree with Rove! Not about his Hillary characterization, which is again just character assassination in keeping with his past campaigns. But he is right to point out elections are about the future, not the past. As angry as I am about Bush's two stolen presidential elections, the trampling of our Constitutional rights, the dirty murderous lies in both the 2000 and 2004 political campaigns and policy development, the looting of the treasury and the mortgaging of America to line the pockets of his Halliburton buddies, and as much as I want revenge by winning the next election, the next election will not be about this corrupt administration. None of the Republican candidates running have had anything to do with this administration. In fact, more of the Democratic candidates have been responsible for the maintenance of the worst Bush policies than the Republicans! Edwards and Clinton both supported ceding their war powers to Bush to grease the skids for the Iraq war, and repeatedly voted for funding it. They have never challenged him in any meaningful way. The Republican front-runners -Giuliani and Romney- had nothing to do with it.
The Democrats had an opportunity to run against Bush in 2004. Instead they chickened out and fell for Rove's accusation that the Democrats only had a negative, anti-Bush message. Instead of running against an incumbent with failed, disastrous policies, and showing Americans how corrupt the administration was, they fell into the trap and ran on a platform of ... what? They would have been far better off attacking Bush relentlessly on Iraq, on jobs, on the environment, on deficits, on health care, on economy- even on taxes, where they could show that the tax burden was shifting to our children, to the middle class, and to the local tax collectors. But they could not figure it out. At their convention, the only speech that attacked Bush was Al Sharpton's ... because he broke their rule of nicey-nicey. So now they are ready to run against Bush- 4 years too late. Don't bother guys!
In all likelihood it will be Clinton against Giuliani. Yes Giuliani has a bad family background, and will not get an automatic pass or even enthusiasm from the religious right. But he will still get their vote over Hillary. He will be painting himself as a tough-on-crime, tough-on-Iran, tough-on-al Qaeda, tough-on-taxes, tough guy. His pro-choice, pro-gay-tolerance stance will keep as many anti-religious-lefts home as religious-rights, so it will be a moot point. And he is not Bush, and this is not 2000 or 2004. The religious right and "family values" voter is not as much of a force this time- they already got most of what they wanted and nobody cares much anymore. He or his PACs will paint Hillary as a "tax and spend liberal Democrat" who doesn't stand for anything except her "hidden liberal agenda", which allows him to paint her however she wants. And he will have unlimited money- likely including some of the billions that went missing in Iraq- to get this message across, even pulling some swift-boat-liar types out of the woodwork after Labor Day 2008.
I did a Google search today for "What do the Democrats stand for?"- I came back with 2,550 hits. I did the same search for "What do the Republicans stand for?" and I came back with 1,440 hits. This suggests that the Democrats' core values are almost twice as vague as the Republicans'. The Democrats had better start making a clear, simple statement of principles that contrasts with the Republicans AND rings true with voters if they want to have any chance in 2008. They do not have the luxury of running against George W Bush in 2008- and they do not deserve that luxury, since they squandered it last time.
More thoughts on the Democratic core values to come.... Email me your best ideas....
|
 |
