Howard Fineman has an interesting piece in Newsweek asking why the Democratic Party can’t seem to capitalize in the GOP’s current weakness. There’s no doubt that this is turning into an annus horribilis for the GOP. January’s promise has long faded into a series of horrendous political stumbles. Bush’s approval numbers are in the toilet, the Republican base is not happy, and DeLay’s legal troubles only make things worse.
A competent party – say the GOP of 1993 – would be salivating right now. Yet Fineman notes that the Democrats aren’t too happy:
With George W. Bush’s presidency mired in the muck of hurricanes and doubts about the war, you’d think Democrats would be bursting with energy, eagerly expecting to regain power. But, in a roomful of well-connected Democrats the other night, I was struck by how gloomy they were. They can’t stand Bush, but didn’t have much faith in their own party’s prospects.
I think Fineman hits on something here. What does the Democratic Party stand for? For the past 5 years it’s been “We hate George W. Bush.” That isn’t enough. It wasn’t enough in 2000. It wasn’t enough in 2002. It wasn’t enough in 2004. It won’t be enough in 2006. In 2008, the issue becomes entirely moot. George W. Bush’s political career ends in January 2009, and basing your entire party on the hatred of one man and his party doesn’t win elections.
If anything, this crisis of leadership is probably good for the Republican Party. The GOP has grown too complacent by far. The fatcat Washington culture has taken over from the Contract for America outsider culture that brought the GOP to power. Bush’s compassionate conservatism means pushing for a responsible fiscal policy but a manifestly irresponsible spending policy. Bush has not shrunk government, he’s grown it faster than ever.
Bush just appears tired – it’s hard to blame him for that, after 5 years of incalculable hatred and vitriol every single day. But the President doesn’t have that luxury. A captain can’t spend time in his cabin when there’s a storm battering the ship – he needs to take the wheel and do his job. Bush needs to be pushing a conservative agenda – demanding fiscal restraint, finding a conservative jurist to replace Justice O’Connor, reforming Social Security, and leading on this war. In other words, the Republican Party needs to stand for something.
The GOP can’t count on Democratic disarray forever. If the Democrats start ditching the Cindy Sheehan/Michael Moore/MoveOn/Daily Kos radical wing of the party and put together some reasonable, articulate, and fiscally responsible candidates the GOP will be in deep trouble in 2006. It’s heartening to see that some Republican lawmakers are getting the idea, but that’s only a start. We’ve lost our way when it comes to how we view government. If we’re the party for Slightly Less Bigger Government instead of the party of Small Government, then a lot of fiscal conservatives – a group that is vastly larger than social conservatives – will start leaving our corner. The division of the GOP isn’t a great as the division between the antiwar radicals and the moderates on the other side of the aisle, but it isn’t something that can be swept away either.
Does that mean that the GOP should surrender to despair like their Democratic colleagues? Absolutely not. Fineman’s right – we have a host of very promising candidates for 2008, and some strong ones for 2006. McCain, Guiliani, and Rice could all wipe the floor with any candidate the Democrats throw at them – and while the old argument says that they’d never survive a primary, don’t be so sure. If Guiliani decides to run, he’s got the job, based simply on his leadership abilities, and especially if he’s willing to draw a compromise on abortion such as supporting parental notification and restricting federal funding of abortion providers. McCain is pro-life, one of the staunchest fiscal conservatives in the Senate, has indicated that he’ll hold the line of taxes, and has been one of the strongest advocates for this war we have. His positions on campaign finance reform are reprehensible, but then again, President Bush is the one whose signature is on the BCRA.
It all comes back to the fundamental truths of politics – the two things that matter are candidates and ideas. Everything else is a sideshow. If the Republicans can start advancing a pro-growth, anti-pork platform for 2006, they stand a reasonable chance of holding onto power or even taking a few vulnerable seats from the Democrats like North Dakota and Minnesota. If not, 2006 is going to get hairy.
Bill Clinton won in 1993 because he advocated a fiscally responsible platform that eschewed the hard left and faced a Republican base that was deeply divided over fiscal issues. The Republicans have a chance now to ensure that history does not repeat itself by embracing the core values of smaller government, fiscal restraint, and national security. It’s time to get this party back on track, because counting on a weakened Democratic Party may end up paying off, but I wouldn’t bet the farm on it.
“A competent party – say the GOP of 1993 – would be salivating right now. Yet Fineman notes that the Democrats aren’t too happy:”
He’s right on the mark. Reid and Pelosi are completely worthless, even with the weak hand the Dems have. Unless they can engineer a Democratic version of the Contract with America in the next 12 months, they stand to be sorely disappointed with the outcomes of next November’s midterms.
“The fatcat Washington culture has taken over from the Contract for America outsider culture that brought the GOP to power. ”
Which, as I tell you repeatedly, is the guaranteed consequence of representative democracy where benefitting your own state requires helping somebody else benefit theirs. A scenario will never occur where 435 (or even 218) Congresspersons follow the Tom Coburn model of letting your own state take it one the chin while everybody else plays the games that have always been played in Washington. If the Alaska delegation “stood on principle” in Coburn’s honor starting tomorrow and let their state be ignored on pet projects, Alaska would become a Democratic state REALLY fast.
“Bush just appears tired – it’s hard to blame him for that, after 5 years of incalculable hatred and vitriol every single day.”
And it has nothing to do with fumbling every pass that comes his way. If I screwed up as many things as Bush did, I’d need to take a nap too.
As for the “incalculable hatred and vitriol” supposedly being tossed Bush’s way, it’s ironic that the shelves of bookstores are lined with titles like “Treason” and “The Enemy Within”…written by Bush allies. The idea that the Democrats are more adept at hate speech is a viewpoint still prominent only with the fast-shrinking audiences of fellow venom peddlers Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh.
“the party and put together some reasonable, articulate, and fiscally responsible candidates the GOP will be in deep trouble in 2006.”
We have them all over the country (Claire McCaskill, Amy Klobuchar, Bob Casey and hopefully Harold Ford)…and had them last time as well (Brad Carson, Inez Tenenbaum, Betty Castor).
“The division of the GOP isn’t a great as the division between the antiwar radicals and the moderates on the other side of the aisle, but it isn’t something that can be swept away either.”
Therein lies the Dems biggest problem and the GOP’s biggest advantage. The pro-abortion rights, anti-war suburban yuppie is willing to accept the body count in Iraq if he still gets his tax cut….just as the populist low-wage store clerk in Chattanooga is willing to accept rolling back ergonomic standards and a stagnant minimum wage if there’s a chance abortion could be criminalized. It’s much harder for the Democrats to bridge the gap between gun-slinging, homosexual-hating steelworkers in West Virginia and pot-smoking, latte-sipping green-haired hippies in Portland.
A national Democratic message sounds great on the surface, but Gene Taylor of southern Mississippi might be a little nervous about it if he has to run on it in his conservative district rather than as his own man.
“McCain, Guiliani, and Rice could all wipe the floor with any candidate the Democrats throw at them ”
McCain probably would, but not necessarily since his nomination could provoke someone from the Gary Bauer wing of the GOP to run third party. McCain has to run fast and hard to the right in time for the convention if he sneaks in as the nominee (just as Bob Dole did), which threatens his credibility as a straight-shooting moderate in the blue states. If the Dems were to nominate a Wesley Clark or a John Edwards or possibly a Mark Warner, McCain’s ascension to the White House would be far from a sure thing.
Giuliani is only appealing with his mouth closed. He oozes New York arrogance when he talks and becomes too annoying share a TV room with in just a few seconds, which makes me wonder if the people of Muskogee, Oklahoma will develop the “cultural connection” with him that is needed to attain their vote. Combine that with his numerous moral indiscretions and he has the same problem with the GOP base as McCain does, which could create an opening for a Southern Democratic nominee. Of course, if the Dems are dumb enough to nominate Hillary, both McCain and Guiliani are shoo-ins.
Condoleeza Rice? What kind of brain-frying drugs do they have out there in South Dakota? America is in no way ready for a woman President let alone a black woman President. Beyond that, Rice has become the most prominent face of incompetence in the Bush administration (at least up until Michael Brown). The double-barrel whammy of “who knew the terrorists would ever think of using planes as missiles” and “I believe the PDB was titled ‘Bin Laden Determined to Attack in the U.S.'” wrote the obituary on her chances for being elected to any public office, let alone the Presidency.
“even taking a few vulnerable seats from the Democrats like North Dakota and Minnesota”
Even if I didn’t live in Minnesota, the Klobuchar-Kennedy race would be my pick for most exciting in the nation. The built-in advantages both candidates have demographically and geographically should make things relentlessly fun. As for North Dakota, does the GOP even have a candidate? I can’t see Conrad being vulnerable unless John Hoeven runs against him. Conrad won last time with more than 60% of the vote even when Bush won by 61% that same year.
I think several Dems are vulnerable that you didn’t mention, including Robert Byrd, Bill Nelson (thank God he’s running against Kathleen Harris), Maria Cantwell and Debbie Stabenow. With that lineup in mind, the Democrats have little chance at significant gains in the Senate.
“It’s time to get this party back on track, because counting on a weakened Democratic Party may end up paying off, but I wouldn’t bet the farm on it.”
The Dems are already fielding three Iraq war veterans for Congressional races in ’06, which in itself lends them desperately-needed credibility. Now we’re discovering that the GOP’s bloody T-shirt Pat Tillman was also fiercely opposed to George Bush. The more prominent figures who come out on the Democratic
side of the war debate, the better the party’s chances of overcoming Reid and Pelosi’s hapless image.
Mark you sound bitter. I really don’t think your guys are making any headway with the politics of scandal and personel attack. Look if they get Delay, which at this point looks pretty slim, since he came out firing and Earle looks like a typical liberal who uses the courts to get his way when the voters won’t let him, this will go the way of Billy Burkett and the media again will look like the affable fools that they are. Then what will the long term stradegy for the Dem’s be, I hate Republicans or vote for me I ain’t him ? Or maybe they’ll adopt your tax scheme with all the poor me Blue state paranoia associated with it, I can only hope. Look didn’t work in 2000, not in 2004 and I don’t think it will work in’06 or’08. Now if Earle could have waited for an October suprise like the DWI charge against Bush, then the “aura of corruption” talking point might of stuck. But again your guys don’t have to many programs or anything tangeable to offer to voter FOR your guys not just against the other guy. And the “I have a plan” thing has been tryed by Kerry last time and it won’t work either. So go ahead and give us Edwards or Clarke or even Hilliary, I just don’t think your guys have a clue. And if they do like Leiberman, they will be eaten alive in your primaries and you’ll have to swerve so far to the left, because the Cindy Scheehans of the world now are your base, that all these politically generated scandals will become just yesterdays news, and it will be more of the same. I vote it for it before I vote against it ..Why aren’t your guys tracking better, I know Bushes numbers are down but Bush isn’t running for anything anymore. Your guys seem like their running against Bush, now against Delay, now against Cheney. None are going to be the Presidential hopefuls.
MARK’S CRYSTAL BALL FORECASTS OF EARLY NOVEMBER HEADLINES…..
FL–NELSON NEEDS NO RECOUNT IN VICTORY OVER HARRIS
MD–CARDIN SHREDS STEELE
MI–STABENOW EASILY WINS RE-ELECTION
MN–KLOBUCHAR KLOBBERS KENNEDY
MO–MCCASKILL PREVAILS; SENATE NOW TALENT-LESS (+1 Dems)
MT–TESTER BURNS BURNS (+2 Dems)
NE–NELSON RE-ELECTED IN REPUBLICAN STRONGHOLD
NY–CLINTON WALKS ALL OVER PIRRO
ND–CONRAD VICTORIOUS….AGAIN
PA–CASEY SLAYS SANTORUM (+3 Dems)
RI–LIBERAL REPUBLICAN CHAFFEE DEFEATED (+4 Dems)
TN–FORD DRIVES OVER GOP CHALLENGER (+5 Dems)
VT–JEFFORDS SEAT OFFICIALLY CHANGES OVER TO DEMS (+6 Dems)
WA–CANTWELL CREAMS VANCE
WV–BYRD SOARS OVER CAPITO
With six pickups, the Dems have a 50-50 Senate on their hands…but I’m being generous to the Republicans and assuming they hold seats in Arizona, Ohio, Nevada and Maine.
In AZ, conservative Jon Kyl will face a well-funded donk challenger who’s likely to be more in tune with the oldies’ position on Social Security that privatizer-cheerleader Kyl.
In ME, Olympia Snowe seems likely to be re-elected, but if the balance of power hung in her hands, I could see her getting revenge on Rove and the gang by changing parties.
In NV, John Ensign is a question mark. I haven’t heard anything about him being vulnerable, but Bush’s 40% approval rating in blue-trending NV won’t help his cause….nor will the prospect of being an impediment to senior Senator Harry Reid’s chances of becoming MAJORITY LEADER instead of Minority Leader.
And in OH, Mike DeWine would probably prevail in a normal year, but with Bush’s 37% approval rating and running on the same ticket as America’s least favorite Republican Governor Bob Taft, DeWine could be handed an upset.
Either way, the Dems are almost assured of taking over the Senate in another 13 months. :))