[Jim Robinson]

Well, I wish he was more conservative in a lot of areas, but that doesn't mean I'd want to toss him overboard for Kerry. If you really believe that any third party candidate is going to get elected to the Presidency in 2004, I think you best quit spiking that cool-aid.

[GeronL]

Let me make this clearer then.

I want Bush to whip Kerry's carcass all over the country.

I want Bush to give me reasons to be more confident that will happen. Supporting more liberal policies in an election year is not a wise move politically.

is that clearer?

[FairOpinion]

The way to move the country towards more conservatism, is to elect more Republicans, so President Bush will be less constrained -- NOT to help elect a Democrat president and lose Republican control of Congress.

Bush's judicial appointments are being filibustered by the Democrats -- if we had 60 Republican Senators, Bush could appoint the judges he wants and have them confirmed expeditiously.

[arasina]

Well, I wish he was more conservative in a lot of areas...

Interesting that in 2000, which some people seem to forget, Gore was being called a "New Democrat" and getting called on the carpet for being TOO CONSERVATIVE.

From a 5/15/2000 Washington Post editorial entitled 'New Democrats': Gore Doesn't Need Friends Like These:

SNIP...
On social issues, Gore embraces mainstream liberal positions--pro-choice, pro-gun control, pro-environmental protection, as well as uneasy support for affirmative action and a nod to gay rights. Choice, guns and the environment are designed to attract the suburban women whom the New Dems paint as the potential swing voters. Like the president, [Clinton] Gore avoids pure laissez-faire liberalism by jettisoning civil liberties. He's for the death penalty, is proud about welfare repeal.

But this does little to insulate the vice president from the liabilities of his conservative economic stance. Gore essentially is saying that at a time of great prosperity, government can't do much for poor and working people. It won't stop companies from taking good jobs overseas. It won't do anything significant on schools or health care. Gore's budget projections--tracking President Clinton's--foresee no increase in discretionary spending. This fall, many forgotten majority swing voters are likely to stay home. And some may choose to vote on guns, God and gays, against Gore's liberalism.

MORE...
But symbolic reforms are easy to imitate. George W. Bush's compassionate conservatism is intent on matching Gore gesture for gesture, from drugs to long-term care.

The New Democrat response--play push-off politics while adopting the "second generation of New Democrat ideas"--privatization of Social Security and turning Medicare into a voucher program--is perverse. Gore will have a hard enough time getting African Americans, the most loyal Democratic voters, to go to the polls. He's already pushed off unions with his support of the China trade bill.

Gore's best hope to capture the forgotten majority is that George W. has copied too much of the New Democrat playbook. Bush's call for partial privatization of Social Security by definition cuts guaranteed benefits and increases individual risk. Turning Medicare into a voucher program also pushes more risk onto the retired. Gore's populist edge will come from pitting the defense of these two programs plus help on prescription drugs against Bush's "risky" tax cut and privatization plans.

If he survives, that will be the final irony. Gore, one of the founders of the New Democrats, will depend on defense of Social Security and Medicare, the signature programs of the New Deal and the Great Society.

It seems those liberal issues are still the live mines on the homefront in this year's election, even while President Bush has to fight the larger battle against those who would have America become just another nation in the United Nations "Community" and abandon the entire war against terrorism.