Dean will make GOP the majority party

Entering 2004, it appears that America is poised to have a defining election that will create a permanent Republican majority. Democrats appear likely to nominate Howard Dean, rather than someone like Dick Gephardt or Joe Lieberman or Wesley Clark who could present a stronger challenge to President Bush in the general election. In doing so, Democrats are also setting the direction that they want their party to follow -- the extreme left. Dean has stated again and again that his first objective is to take over the Democratic Party and return it to its roots. In doing so, he will part ways from Democrats such as Bill Clinton and Lieberman, who felt that Democrats need to veer to the center in elections and then govern from the left. Like another presidential candidate, Barry Goldwater, Dean's first objective is his party's machinery. But unlike Goldwater, Dean is wrong on what the American people want. From the 1952 election of Dwight D. Eisenhower, Americans have been turning more conservative. Goldwater's ideas were right on target with millions of Americans, but he was shot down by his own misstatements and by liberals in his own party who thought imitating Democrats was the way to victory. The subsequent elections of Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush demonstrate the resonance of Goldwater's ideas. Dean's ideas, on the other hand, are not popular with a majority of the American voters or even a majority of Democrats. But under the arcane nominating rules, Dean will most likely be the Democratic nominee. Sensing this, Al Gore recently rushed to endorse Dean. In doing so, Gore hoped to imitate Nixon. Nixon knew Goldwater would lose in 1964. But Nixon realized that Goldwater's overall philosophy was a winner, so he supported Goldwater wholeheartedly, hoping to inherit his support in 1968 and with that the presidency. Gore believes that the same will happen to him. But Gore is miscalculating. The country is more conservative and grows more so daily. Gore and Dean are out of touch with a majority of Americans with their support for same-sex marriages. In foreign policy, they resemble Neville Chamberlain more so than Harry Truman. And by backing them, the Democrats are consigning themselves to minority status for the long term. The 2004 presidential race will be a defining election in American politics, akin to that of Franklin Roosevelt's in 1936 that truly established the Democrats as a majority party. Key groups that can make up a new Republican majority are forming. Jewish-Americans, long a stalwart of the Democrats, are ready to vote Republican over what they see as not only Dean's but the Democratic Party's abandonment of Israel. Hispanics have also shown, most recently in the California recall, that they will vote Republican. Finally, Democrats are writing off an entire section of the country -- the South. The Dean nomination will be the final action needed to set off the Republican majority at all levels. Dean is not a godsend to Republicans; he is the defining moment that Republicans have needed to become the majority party. --David E. Johnson is the CEO of Strategic Vision LLC, an Atlanta-based public relations and public affairs company.

This reinforces what I have been sensing about the coming election for some time now, except that I doubt that any large gains by the Republicans will be permanent. He does not mention, however, some other factors that favor the Republicans, such as (1) Texas redistricting will apparently go through, with Republicans picking up 5 - 7 House seats, (2) the new census has increased the electoral votes from the states that Bush carried in 00, (3) there are more incumbent Democratic senate seats up this time than Republican - including 5 southern Dems who will not be running again.

If we found either Osama or Iraqi WMDs (or both), that would add even more momentum.

paragraphs are our friends:

Entering 2004, it appears that America is poised to have a defining election that will create a permanent Republican majority. Democrats appear likely to nominate Howard Dean, rather than someone like Dick Gephardt or Joe Lieberman or Wesley Clark who could present a stronger challenge to President Bush in the general election.

In doing so, Democrats are also setting the direction that they want their party to follow -- the extreme left. Dean has stated again and again that his first objective is to take over the Democratic Party and return it to its roots. In doing so, he will part ways from Democrats such as Bill Clinton and Lieberman, who felt that Democrats need to veer to the center in elections and then govern from the left.
Like another presidential candidate, Barry Goldwater, Dean's first objective is his party's machinery. But unlike Goldwater, Dean is wrong on what the American people want. From the 1952 election of Dwight D. Eisenhower, Americans have been turning more conservative. Goldwater's ideas were right on target with millions of Americans, but he was shot down by his own misstatements and by liberals in his own party who thought imitating Democrats was the way to victory. The subsequent elections of Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush demonstrate the resonance of Goldwater's ideas. Dean's ideas, on the other hand, are not popular with a majority of the American voters or even a majority of Democrats.

But under the arcane nominating rules, Dean will most likely be the Democratic nominee. Sensing this, Al Gore recently rushed to endorse Dean. In doing so, Gore hoped to imitate Nixon. Nixon knew Goldwater would lose in 1964. But Nixon realized that Goldwater's overall philosophy was a winner, so he supported Goldwater wholeheartedly, hoping to inherit his support in 1968 and with that the presidency.

Gore believes that the same will happen to him. But Gore is miscalculating. The country is more conservative and grows more so daily. Gore and Dean are out of touch with a majority of Americans with their support for same-sex marriages. In foreign policy, they resemble Neville Chamberlain more so than Harry Truman. And by backing them, the Democrats are consigning themselves to minority status for the long term.The 2004 presidential race will be a defining election in American politics, akin to that of Franklin Roosevelt's in 1936 that truly established the Democrats as a majority party.

Key groups that can make up a new Republican majority are forming. Jewish-Americans, long a stalwart of the Democrats, are ready to vote Republican over what they see as not only Dean's but the Democratic Party's abandonment of Israel. Hispanics have also shown, most recently in the California recall, that they will vote Republican. Finally, Democrats are writing off an entire section of the country -- the South. The Dean nomination will be the final action needed to set off the Republican majority at all levels. Dean is not a godsend to Republicans; he is the defining moment that Republicans have needed to become the majority party. --David E. Johnson is the CEO of Strategic Vision LLC, an Atlanta-based public relations and public affairs company.

I'm sure the alarm bells are ringing in the backrooms of the Democratic Party as you say but who's going to come to the rescue? Certainly not John Kerry who has turned out to be a bigger stiff then Mike Dukakis (and who disgraced himself by saying the "f" word in a recent magazine interview).

Not Gephardt - he's an old hack who's been around forever and the Democrats only have success with new faces in presidential elections (Clinton, Carter, JFK).

I can't see any of the others gaining any traction (Clark, Lieberman, etc.)

That leaves...Al Sharpton!

Don't even think about The Shrew. If Dean will guarantee a GOP majority, The Shrew will guarantee a filibuster-proof GOP majority.

Yes, the Democrats are in a real fix. And the economy and recent successes in the WOT isn't helping.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.