BUH-BYE!
Posted on 11/06/2002 9:25:28 AM PST by gubamyster
Terry McAuliffe wants you to know that the Democrats did just fine yesterday--and that they're still mad about 2000.
by Jonathan V. Last
11/06/2002 12:00:00 PM
Jonathan V. Last, online editor
THE BIG STORY of last night's elections was that America overwhelmingly chose the Republican vision of the future over the Democratic vision (or lack of vision). The big story today is what the Democrats will do in the face of their resounding defeat. By all indications, they still don't understand that they have a problem.
Late last night, amidst the wave of Republican victories, there were two beacons of establishment liberal thought who previewed the lack of understanding among Democrats. In the Washington Post's News Analysis, David Von Drehle wrote that "the story of Election 2002 seemed to be the continuing inability of both parties to form a strong governing majority"--this as the electorate was handing the reins of both houses of Congress to the party that controls the White House.
In the New York Times's News Analysis, R.W. Apple wrote that "the nation voted yesterday in a mood of disenchantment and curious disconnection from the political system." Which is a curious way to look at a historic election. More Apple: "Senator John McCain, the Arizona Republican, said, 'I see a Republican breeze blowing'--but if there was such a breeze, it was more an autumn breeze than a cyclone." Tell that to Walter Mondale, Jean Carnahan, Jeanne Shaheen, Erskine Bowles, Max Cleland, Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, and Roy Barnes--all of whom went to bed on November 4 thinking they had good chances of winning.
But the most revealing comment in these analyses came from Von Drehle, who said of the Democrats, "Party leaders had boasted that they would make [Jeb] Bush pay for his role in the choice of his brother as president two years ago." [emphasis added] Here we are in 2002, and the Washington Post still doesn't think that George W. Bush was elected.
Which makes sense, of course, since most Democrats don't either. Party chairman (for now) Terry McAuliffe sure doesn't. Remember, he's the guy who said, in May of 2001, "We won that election, and they stole that election. President Bush tells us to get over it. Well, we're not going to get over it."
Since then, the Democratic party's obsession with electoral victory over ideological principle has lead them down a dark alley. Through a series of actions this fall, they became, in the national consciousness, the party of dirty tricks. Still, the electorate seemed to tolerate their avarice, and they were poised to hold their own in the elections--until the Paul Wellstone memorial/pep rally.
The Wellstone rally instantly polarized the race and defined Democrats as the party of do-anything-to-win. Christopher Caldwell explained what was so uncomfortable about this image: "One of our major political parties, or at least a sizable wing of it, appeared to be dancing a jig on the grave of a particularly beloved fallen comrade. What must they think of the rest of us?"
As people began asking themselves this question, Republicans instantly started gaining in polls. The issue festered over the weekend, and, much like George W. Bush's drunk-driving arrest story did in 2000, produced a modest, but palpable, across-the-board shift in the electorate in just a few days.
So where do the Democrats go from here? As late as yesterday afternoon they were still up to no-good, as McAuliffe put out an blatantly dishonest statement accusing Republicans of voter fraud in an attempt to stimulate the Democratic base with memories of 2000. This morning, McAuliffe said that he thought Democrats actually had a strong showing because of their gubernatorial victories in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Illinois. Tom Daschle told CNN that he blames last night's losses on . . . the media!
But it isn't the media that sparked last night's Republican surge. It's that people don't like this face of the Democratic party. Unfortunately for the Democrats, as Anna Quindlen once wrote, they just don't get it.
Jonathan V. Last is online editor of The Weekly Standard.
The Democrats aren't able to reconcile their two opposing drives. I noticed the liberal pundits on TV last night had a hard time with this, too.
The liberals couldn't find a logical way of saying both
and
Bingo, right on the money.
That's the point when the folks in the middle took notice and reacted by showing up at the polls and voting Republican. It was perhaps the greatest tactical blunder I've ever seen in politics.
I saw McCauliffe's press conference on the toob at lunchtime. He was in massive denial. And he kept looking around nervously, like he knew a gang of labor union thugs were coming over to take him for a one-way ride.
The above quote comes from the link in this article to dirty tricks which leads to a great article about Dirty Democrats.
By all indications, they still don't understand that they have a problem.
May they never understand this.
Just keep in mind: That disgraceful pep rally didn't have to happen--the Scumocrats CHOSE to dance on Paul Wellstone's grave. Shame on them for turning the memorial service into a partisan nyah-nyah-nyah-a-athon. They got EXACTLY what they deserved for that.
If I were Paul Wellstone's family, I would be devastated that my father's legacy was flushed down the commode by a bunch of trailer trash partisans dancing on his grave. (needless to say, I don't believe for one minute McAwful's lies that the DNC had nothing to do with planning the service.)
Look at Clinton in 1996. The times were booming and Clinton proposed to do next to nothing and the public approved. After the disaster of Hillary care there were no more Clinton pushes for big change. Clinton didn't do much except Monica.. That did not hurt peace or prosperity and it did not hurt Bill.
Bush won in 2000 largely on the personality factor. The public liked the Clinton Gore adminstration policies. They just did not like Al Gore. I posted at the time Gore could win, if he went to Europe the year before the 2000 election and then let Robert Redford play him on TV until after the election. Al did not take my advice.
Repubicans in some respects succeeded in the mid to late 90s because they offered gridlock. The times were good and the Republicans could insure that Hillary could not do Hillary care. Times were good and the public wanted nothing changed.
But then as the economy turned down and 911 brought danger to the nation. That turns the public 180 degrees. mode. There were problems and the people wanted policticans to work together fix them. They want change and obstructismi will not win public approval. If the Democrats had offered a set of fixes and demanded Bush enact them, they could have had that traditional mid-term bounce. But the times ARE dangerous and the econmy IS not so good. The Democrats offer of Gridlock was 180 degrees out of phase with what the public wants. They voted accordingly. They punished the natioal Democrats. Democratic governor candidates who proposed fixes and change got elected. Status quo guys did not do so well.
The democrats still don't get it. As the party out of power on the national stage the democrats need to match the times. They are not doing so. When the times are bad or there is danger, Democrats must work with the party in power. Then the voters will reward them.
Terry McAuliffe and the Democrats have yet to figure it out. They want to fight. They want more fillibusters. They want to try again to get one Bush at a time. If they do not learn, the public will give bush 5 more seats in the house in 2004 and 10 more seats in the senate. It will be hard to stop bush when he has 62 seats in the Senate.
It is strange to watch it unfold. It seems the Demorats don't have a clue.
In the New York Times's News Analysis, R.W. Apple wrote that "the nation voted yesterday in a mood of disenchantment and curious disconnection from the political system."
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.