Most people give the voting public too much credit. A frighteningly large number of people in this country have the political awareness of squirrels - they couldn’t tell you who ran for President in 2004; they don’t know the name of their governor, their senator, or their congressman; they don’t know we have troops in Afghanistan and Iraq; they don’t know which side won World War II; they haven’t read a book or a newspaper or even watched a TV news show in ten years. So if you asked these people what their opinion was on any political issue right now, their answer would be “huh?”
And here’s the secret of getting elected: wait until six months before the election; make up a bunch of stuff; and start talking. You can tell these turnips anything - you could tell them your opponent was the guy responsible for letting the Martians take over Canada and they wouldn’t know any better. So say anything that’ll work; tell them you won a war, tell them you lowered their taxes, tell them gay people want to rape their children, tell them you singlehandedly fought back the Martian menace. And tell them that your opponent collaborated with the Martians, voted to legalize gay child rape, and wants to raise their taxes and use the money to burn American flags and kill kittens. Work the morons up into a panic and turn them loose on election day.
At this point, the Dems do not have an electable candidate on the radar. And no, Hillary is not electable. Right now, I’d say the next President is going to be John McCain. This does not particularly please me, but I don’t see a Dem that can beat him.
Born and raised Northern California Democrat, here.
Let’s see…first, they’ll nominate some middle-aged white guy with no charisma. Let’s call him Senator Cinderblock. (OK, he’s got a Ph.D. in English Literature. Doctor Cinderblock.)
Now, the really far left liberals will vote Green or commie or something, so he doesn’t have to worry about them, but that means that he’ll have to try and make himself appealing to the centrists, moderates, and fence-sitters, which means making his platform more moderate, while not so liberal that it’ll alienate the remaining leftists.
So, my gut feeling is that, for his platform and overall strategy, he’ll play on three angles; something to appeal to the middle class (“Less taxes for welfare!”), token leftist angle (“No executing serial killers!”) and, of course, the “I’m not George Bush!” line. In addition, they’ll probably try a “competant leadership and intregrity” line—meaning that he’s successfully pushed pencils around somewhere without causing a mass famine or while employing people later embroiled corruption/espionage scandal, and that he hasn’t been caught in a major lie within the last two years.
Maybe he’ll win. Maybe I’ll even vote for him—either way, I, a centrist, get screwed somehow.
This time for sure…Nevada’s caucus has just been moved up, we follow Iowa so every candidate will be flying into Nevada hourly. I went to the last Nevada Democratic caucus, and intend to go again the next time.
I will be looking for two things:
A candidate who can win.
A candidate who is not a left wing Republican in disguise.
Despite my flippant answer to Little Nemo, I think the American public is pissed off enough at Bush to actually vote in a Democrat for President, and I think the Republicans know this as well. The trick is to find the right candidate and trust me, I am not the only liberal Dem to think like that.
The problem, as usual, is the dirty politics and the usual Republican tricks of turning the election into a debate about Gay Marriage and Flag Burning “hot button” issues for the dumbmasses. I am Gay, and to be quite honest, fuck the concept of Gay Marriage…deal with that at a later date, lie, whatever…just ignore it and go for the real issues and get those ratbastards out and try to put this country back on track so that American kids are not being needlessly slaughtered in Iraq, Bush cronies are not given pork barrel contracts and American tourists don’t have to disguise themselves as Canadians to travel abroad.
I think Iraq and Hurricane Katrina will come back and bite the Republicans in the ass this next election, but we need a candidate who will not shy from fighting back just as dirty as the Rove SS troopers. "Tis a fine line, but I think a candidate will be found to do it.
I suspect they will return to the “Anybody But Bush” theme as they did in 2004. It will be overwhelmingly successful on the SDMB. IRL, perhaps less so.
We Dems just love Hillary; recent polls show as many as 40% of Dems want her to seek the nomination. TIME doesn’t think she will, though, and probably with good reason.
If there’s anyone with any brains left in the Democratic National Committee leadership, they’ll listen to Howard Dean and do some long-term planning and rebuild the party from the ground up. That assumes a helluvalot, but if they do that, they’ll run an unmemorable candidate like John Edwards or Bill Richardson in '08 and wait for some young turk (probably a governor again – think Mark Warner) to catch fire in 2012. The problem with Warner is there’s already a website devoted to drafting him for 2008, and if he makes a serious run at the nomination, his star will have flamed out four years from now.
That means conceding at least one more term to the Republicans, but if McCain can secure the nomination (he has his hands full with Rudy Guiliani right now, it seems) he’ll probably win in a landslide, on the assumption that he can’t possibly make things worse, and if anybody can get us the hell out of Iraq, and old war hero can. (In my political fantasies, McCain drafts Bill Frist as his VP, effectively muzzling him, then hires Wes Clark as his chief of staff, keeps Condi Rice as Secretary of State and brings back Colin Powell as defense secretary. The neocons slink back to their congressional districts, fading from power for another generation.)
So, how can the Democrats lose the presidential contest in 2008? Run.
Maybe they’ll pull what the Dems are doing in the Colorado gubernatorial contest - put up a pro-life candidate*. Ha ha! Those wacky Democrats.
Candidate Dem. Bill Ritter on NPR this morning admitted that since Roe v. Wade is the law of the land, he’ll support allowing abortions for women who have been raped or to save the life of the mother. And that S. Dakota messed up only in not including rape in their anti-abortion laws. His website doesn’t exactly back up his statements this morning.
It boggles my mind that people are willing to project their own political views, regardless of their applicability, on to John McCain. You realize that the main divergence between McCain on Iraq and Bush is that McCain is more hawkish, right?
I never said he wasn’t. I’ve re-read my post, and I don’t see any reference to pulling out and leaving the mess unresolved. I think most Americans believe we wouldn’t be in Iraq now if McCain had won the GOP nomination in 2000. I think Americans want a hawk with some courage and intelligence. I haven’t heard a single Democratic contender make the kind of “git-R-done” noise McCain has made. Most Americans don’t want a “cut-and-run” kind of withdrawal – they at least want the job finished. Since the 2004 election, McCain has been unwaveringly critical of the half-assed prosecution of the war – and well he should be. Thus my conclusion that most voters would assume that John McCain would quit fucking around in Iraq, kill whoever needs killing, give the puppet regime there a deadline to clamp a lid on things, and bring the troops home. I’m not saying I believe he would actually do that (I have no idea what he would actually do) but I think it’s the course the American voters envision if McCain is elected. I don’t see that as “projecting their own political views,” I see it as desiring a good end to the war.
The dems love Hillary? Since when? At any of the Dem blogs/sites she’s never even in the top 5.
By all means, lets elect someone based on charisma. We’ve seen how well that’s gone.
I’m not saying your suggesting that but I heard it often enough during the election.
I wouldn’t call Bill Gates a charismatic guy, but it sure hasn’t hurt Microsoft. Why should it be any different for a president. This whole likability factor baffles me.
We have no delusions that Ritter is enthusiastic about abortion rights. His web site, in fact, plainly says he doesn’t like abortion. Remember, he has to try to win in a state that gave rise to Focus on Family and Marilyn Musgrave. It won’t be easy.
On the other hand, I’ve always made a point of calling myself a pro-life Democrat. Because, really, how can anyone be against life?
Blogs aren’t double blind surveys. Blogs are posted by activists, who probably have a similar political awareness to major news organizations. When push comes to shove, Hillary won’t be pushed to the front; in fact, she may simply choose to not run. But when you poll Democrats across America, we put Hillary solidly in front. There’s no rationale for it, except maybe to push the collective face of neoconservatism into a deep cow pie – just before the Republicans win another term in the White House.
Let’s see how commited to this whole “Pro-Life” thing y’all are. Instead of blocking access to med clinics, why don’t y’all link arms and block the entrance to cemeteries?
(pro-lifers) “She can’t come in!”
(funeral mourners) “But she’s dead! She was my grandmother! She got hit by a bus–she was 96!”
I’m sorry… I misinterpreted your “get the hell out of Iraq” comment as “get out of Iraq ASAP.” Although I suspect that while it may not apply to you specifically, many people really do project their own political views on to McCain.
We’re also in a state that has no problem electing Democrat governers (Dick Lamb, Roy Romer recently, since 1940 equal Dem/Rep gov’s), and home to Diana DeGette and the Peoples Republic of Boulder.
All that aside, since he’s going up against Bob Boueapraeax, er Beaupray. No, um… (google) “Beauprez”, he’s got my vote. What a jerk that guy seems to be. If the dems can’t fight off ol’ Bob, they might as well pack up and go home.
Me? I’m pro-abortion. I also believe that both parties would give a sigh of relief to know that I don’t associate myself with them.
One thing the Dems have to do for sure is negate the Republican’s Diebold advantage. They need to ensure a paper trail. I think they should also avoid impeaching Bush (as richly as he deserves it) after they regain control of Congress in November. Any attempt at impeachment would be doomed to a public perception of partsan gamesmanship and Bush’s actual shittiness would be pettifogged in the process. It would be much better to let him go on being shitty while attacking him as little as possible (it’s next to impossible for Dems to be critical of Bush without having the entire issue becoming a referendum on the personal character and motives of the accuser. The substance of the criticism is never addressed by the media or given any credence. All they care about is how it plays politically). They need to be quiet and let Bush’s shittiness be the story without constantly leaping to their feet and shoutng it out (which only turns THEM into the story and diverts attention AWAY from Bush’s shittiness).
I also think they can’t be pussies anymore during the election. They need to be as nasty, vicious and slanderous as the Republicans are. That’s what wins elections, not ideology, honor or substance.
How about NOT holding the convention right before the Olympics? Don’t give the Republicans and their swift boat buddies 3 weeks to attack the Dem candidate without responding.
