"We have lost our ambition, our imagination, and our willingness to do the things that built the Golden Gate Bridge" - Barack Obama (aka President Malaise)
Pitch in with the Prince William Young Republicans and help defeat Obama in 2012!
Fascinating Democrats
By RHarrison | 1 August 2006 | US Senate | 5 Comments
Something interesting could happen next Tuesday in Connecticut. Joe Lieberman might not win the Democratic nomination for the Senate. The man whom Al Gore selected to be Vice President might not win his party’s nomination six years later. In his place is a political neophyte with radical left-wing ideas, no experience, and few actual positions beyond hating the President. Fascinating.
Something similar happened in Virginia this summer when Webb beat Miller for the Democratic nomination for Senate. Despite a good political resume, party organization support and lots of money, Miller was soundly beaten by someone who has none of those things. Again, fascinating.
It seems that Democratic Party members have decided that the only qualification one needs to be in the Senate is a pathological opposition to the war in Iraq. You don’t need to have a plan for getting us out of Iraq, just lots of good lines about how wrong it was to invade in the first place.
What’s even more interesting is the response of Democratic leaders to these developments. A few Democratic politicians have come out in support Ned Lemont (Lieberman’s opponent), but most have not. Lieberman has been endorsed by the Clintons, most of his Senate colleagues, most major unions, Planned Parenthood, and dozens of other liberal interest groups. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has even said it will support Lieberman if he runs as an independent. Yet, he trails badly in the polls.
Webb had some endorsements, but Miller had far more and had more endorsements from prominent Democrats. Yet Webb won. A quick look at Webb’s finances shows that, while many Democrats have now endorsed Webb, few are giving him money. Webb has been abandoned by the Democratic leadership, just like Lamont.
The Democratic Part has long has an elitism problem. For example: John Kerry. It looks like we now have a situation where Democratic primary voters are refusing to listen to their party’s leaders, and party leaders consider themselves above listening to their party voters.
Democracies are built on dialog. Elected officials need to be constantly talking to, and listening to, their voters. Voters, in turn, need to talk and listen to our political leaders – not to follow them blindly, but to understand why decisions are being made. After all, our leaders were chosen to be our leaders for a reason.
It looks like this isn’t happening within the Democratic Party. Leaders and voters are just doing their own thing without consulting or considering the opinions of the other. As a result, Allen will likely cruise to victory here in Virginia and will be well positioned to run for the Presidency in 2008. And it looks likely that the Democrats will lose one of their most respected and accomplished Senators, replacing him with a hack with huge potential to embarrass his party.
To Republicans, this is very fascinating.
The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.
You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed.
5 Comments
Views: 607
Loading ...
Webb was endorsed by Senators Schumer, Dodd, Kerry and a few other Senators.
I won’t bother with all the differences between the situation in CT and VA, but Lamont’s view on Iraq is here - http://nedlamont.com/issues/27/iraq
And Miller had Mark Warrner and the support of a good chunk of the Northern Virginian Democratic establishment. Not Larry Sabato had a good series of posts on this.
But that’s not entirely my point. Webb has been endorsed by John Kerry. Great! Where is the support? Webb raised just over $1 million so far for his campaign. Kerry, Schumer and Robb could raise that in an afternoon if they wanted to - but they haven’t.
The Democratic establishment has been unwilling to back candidates supported by Democratic voters. This is going to hurt them over time.
Not unwilling, but I imagine they have been waiting to see who has legs, and I think they may be waiting too late for Webb.
As I noted over on NLS, the democrats need six seats to take the senate. They likely see good to great chances in MT, MO, RI, and a lead pipe cinch in PA. They will want to put the $$ into either holding loose seats or picking off the other two. Given that Webb is taking a hit in polls, and given that his own internal fundraising is hardly raising the roof, I imagine they are holding off on pumping $$$ into the Webb campaign until either (a) they think he has a real shot, or (b) they don’t have any other options for a pick-up.
Yes, the longer they wait, the less good it does…and therein lies the rub.
The EMILY group that was geared toward electing women (”Early money is like Yeast”) recognized that $1 in June and July was worth $2 in October. Team Schumer is holding off to see where the money should go, but by delaying sending big money to Webb they are diminishing what he can accomplish with it when and if it finally comes in.
the only qualification one needs to be in the Senate is a pathological opposition to the war in Iraq
Is any opposition to the war inherently “pathological”? Or, can candidates be opposed to the war without their opposition being labeled “pathological”?
Likewise, with “hating the President” - is all political opposition to the President inherently hateful? Or, does the writer have some particular insight into the souls of these “haters”?
I don’t know if Webb hates the president, but MANY many democrats don’t simply oppose the President, they do actually hate him.