Skip to comments.Democrats Are Winning... Except at the Polls
Posted on 06/11/2006 10:47:56 PM PDT by West Coast Conservative
"This is just to cover Bush's (rear) so he doesn't have to answer questions" about things in Iraq, said Rep. Pete Stark, second ranking Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee. "This insurgency is such a confused mess that one person, dead or alive at this point, is hardly significant today," said Rep. Jim McDermott, formerly the lead Democrat on the House ethics committee. The deceased, said Rep. Dennis Kucinich, a candidate for the 2004 presidential nomination, was a small part of "a growing anti-American insurgency." He said the United States should get out of Iraq. "We're there for all the wrong reasons."
Such was the reaction of the left wing of the Democratic Party to the killing of al-Qaida terrorist Abu Masab Zarqawi in Iraq. It was not the dominant note sounded by Democrats. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid and 2004 presidential nominee John Kerry all hailed the death of Zarqawi in unequivocal terms. And if Democrats also made the point that his death probably won't end the violence in Iraq, they were only echoing what George W. Bush said.
Nevertheless the Stark-McDermott-Kucinich reaction, echoed and amplified, often scatologically, by dozens of commenters on the popular dailykos.com and myDD.com left-wing Websites, tells us something disturbing about the Democratic Party -- and provides a clue why Democrats were unable to eke out a win in last week's special congressional election in the 50th congressional district of California.
It comes down to this: A substantial part of the Democratic Party, some of its politicians and many of its loudest supporters do not want America to succeed in Iraq. So vitriolic and all-consuming is their hatred for George W. Bush that they skip right over the worthy goals we have been, with some considerable success, seeking there -- a democratic government, with guaranteed liberties for all, a vibrant free economy, respect for women -- and call this a war for oil, or for Halliburton.
Successes are discounted, setbacks are trumpeted, the level of American casualties is treated as if it were comparable to those in Vietnam or World War II. Allegations of American misdeeds are repeated over and over; the work of reconstruction and aid of American military personnel and civilians is ignored.
In all this they have been aided and abetted by large elements of the press. The struggle in Iraq has been portrayed as a story of endless and increasing violence. Stories of success and heroism tend to go unreported. Reporters in Iraq deserve respect for their courage -- this has been an unusually deadly war for journalists, largely because they have been targeted by the terrorists. But unfortunately they and the Bush administration have not done a good job of letting us know that last pertinent fact.
We are in an asymmetrical struggle with vicious enemies who slaughter civilians and bystanders and journalists without any regard for the laws of war. But too often we and our enemies are portrayed as moral equivalents. One or two instances of American misconduct are found equal in the balance to a consistent and premeditated campaign of barbarism.
All of this does not go unnoticed by America's voters. The persistence of violence in Iraq has done grave damage to George W. Bush's job rating, and polls show that his fellow Republicans are in trouble. Yet when people actually vote, those numbers don't seem to translate into gains for the Democrats. In 2004, John Kerry got 44 percent of the votes in the 50th district of California. In the April 2006 special primary, Democrat Francine Busby got 44 percent of the votes there. In the runoff last week, she got 45 percent and lost to Republican Brian Bilbray.
The angry Democratic left set the tone for the 2003-04 campaign for the party's presidential nomination, and John Kerry hoped that it would produce a surge in turnout in November 2004. It did: Kerry got 16 percent more popular votes than Al Gore. But George W. Bush got 23 percent more popular votes in 2004 than in 2000.
In California's 50th, both parties made mammoth turnout efforts, but the balance of turnout and of opinion seems to have remained the same, even though Democrats had a seriously contested primary for governor and Republicans didn't. The angry Democratic left and its aiders and abettors in the press seem to have succeeded in souring public opinion, but they haven't succeeded in producing victory margins for the Democrats. Maybe they're doing just the opposite.
Could it be that Americans know there's more to the Iraq picture than "the persistence of violence" reported by the drive-by media? Could it be that the polls are manufactured by that same media in order to have something to talk about? Could it be that the American people's spines are a lot stronger than the whiners in the media and the democrat party give them credit for? Could it be that the media and the dems are perpetually astonished when they, and only they, believe their own advertising?
The phrase 'Don't Believe The Hype' comes to mind when it comes to the MSM constant stories about our demise and impending Dem supremacy.
This can not be said too often. Democrats want the US to fail in Iraq and as a country so they can return to power, pick up the pieces and remake the US in their own image.
Mr. Barone, in all of his great wisdom, has outlined what no major pundit (Charlie Cook, Stuart Rothenberg, etc.) has a clue to, which is why both of these pundits and scores more will look like buttheads, as they did in 2000, 2002 & 2004, on the day after the elections of 2006. The current Democrat Party will lose seats in both the Senate and House, even though the Republican Party has its fair share of RINO/Liberal idiots. The American voter will stick with GW Bush and the Republicans, because they believe and know that the Democrat party will never defend America and its citizens from an attack, either inside or outside the country. All one has to do is be objective in studying the primary returns of this electoral season, to note and see the developing trends. Of course, Democrat lovers like Mr. Cook and Mr. Rothenberg, along with the MSM democrat lackeys will paint and skew a different picture, but at the end of the day, the average American voter will say: Please don't pee down my back and tell me its raining. I personally believe the Democrat Party is on the road to self-destruction, for if they do not recapture at least the House this year, they will not win the POTUS race in 2008. When one lives their entire life in denial of reality, the only outcome can be defeat at the polls. End of story!!!
In a story in today's paper about the Kos convention, the Washington Times reports that when Warner addressed the group, and mentioned Zarqawi's demise, there was NO applause..not one clap..
"maybe they're doing just the opposite"....shhhhhhhh!
"MANY conservatives are unhappy about domestic policy, but we are VERY UNITED in foriegn policy."
That's why I think Condi Rice can get the nomination and win the General Election.
"... the polls are manufactured by that same media ..."
You are so correct! The pollsters have been using 11-14% more democrats in their polls. I guess when you do that you can get any answer you want.
Plus, the pollsters use "adults" - which means they may not vote, or may not even be registered to vote, or maybe they are not even citizens.
The whole time the drive-by media was saying Bush's numbers were below 35% - Rasmussen still had the President at 43%. I found that extremely interesting.
Except of course, if it turns out to be one of his liberal buddies and then it becomes personal. He just might ask for withdrawal just to show who's boss. What a complete ***.
I figure let the dems continue to dillude themselves that the immegration unhappyness translates to unease about Iraq... that will be their downfall. They cannot resist the bait.
Smarter people than me (ie Rove) know this as well.
The Dems hate Rove more than they hate UBl. That's all there is to it.
"The current Democrat Party will lose seats in both the Senate and House, even though the Republican Party has its fair share of RINO/Liberal idiots. The American voter will stick with GW Bush and the Republicans, because they believe and know that the Democrat party will never defend America and its citizens from an attack, either inside or outside the country. All one has to do is be objective in studying the primary returns of this electoral season, to note and see the developing trends."
Wow, you're the first person I've seen actually say THIS.
I'd sure rather be fighting over who dominates the Congress the GOP won again than who gets the crumbs left over.
I guess we'll see. I'll be working toward a conservative win regardless.
You buried the lead, Michael: and you should have edited out the phrases "A substantial part of", "some of", and "many of". Here. Let me fix it for you:
There. Now you have accuracy.
It's too bad this wasn't a different era.
The whole Democrat party would be hanging in the public square for treason.
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.