September 08, 2003
Disgruntled Conservatives
Democrats are not the only political constituency that are interested in seeing Bush out of office in 2004. A growing base of core Republican voters are growing increasingly hostile to the Bush presidency. The Spoons Experience has compiled a list of offenses.
Spoons' list contains a number of items that are most likely outside the platform and values held by Democratic candidates and voters. However, there are a number of issues that the Democrats may be able to use to woo some of these voters in 2004. From the blog entry:
- "Spending: The era of big government is back. Even non-defense spending is skyrocketing."
"Bureaucracy: More new federal regulations added to the CFR than in any prior administration. So much for getting government off your back."
"Trade/Steel Tariffs: Craven (and probably ineffective) political move, betrayal of free trade principles."
"U.N. (Iraq): Let U.N. delay Iraq war for 15 months after Bush told us, “Time is not on our side.” Is this why we’re not finding WMDs? What did the delay cost us?"
"Israel/Terrorism: Continues to deal with the Palestinians, even though they have not lived up to their commitments to stop terror and have not elected new leadership not compromised by terror, and despite his promise that he wouldn't deal with them until the Palestinians elected (remember that?) new leaders 'not compromised by terror.'"
"Saudi Arabia: Bush too close to Saudis, Abdullah. Pretends they’re partners in war against terrorism. In reality, they’re on the other side."
"Tax Cuts: Even in this category, Bush undoes many of his victories. Caves to Democrats, supports tax cuts to people who don't pay taxes. Brags that he’s taking more and more people off the tax rolls. Ignores that this simply increases the number of voters who have no stake in the fiscal health of the country, and who have incentive to vote for pols who want to raise taxes on 'the rich.'"
From this list, the question that pops up is can the Democrats can field a small government, pro-free trade, pro-Israel candidate? The traditional answer has been "no", but given the course of the current administration it might be easier to outmaneuver the Republicans at their own game than it has been in recent years. Is it possible to field a candidate that is true to the Democratic base yet is able to attract these defectors rather than drive them to a third-party protest candidate?
Posted by cjkarr at September 8, 2003 10:18 AMQuote:
“From this list, the question that pops up is can the Democrats can field a small government, pro-free trade, pro-Israel candidate?”
Well, we can field a candidate who makes the connection that whatever government you get, you have to pay for. Anyway, Republicans being for small government is a hoax and has been for at least 20 years. They want to get rid of spending on Democratic priorities and add spending on theirs. Spending on government will always be higher if the people buying it are putting it on credit and pretending it’s free.
Lieberman is trying to paint him as anti-Israel as he softens his one-sidedly pro-Israel statements, but I don’t think it will stick.
He’s basically pro-trade, too, but he wants to pressure the countries we buy cheap manufactured goods from to allow unionization and get some environmental standards, and he’s talking up the “or else” clause because it’s what a certain chunk of likely primary voters want to do unconditionally. My impression is that he’s more unambiguously pro-trade than pro-Israel, but that he’s more vulnerable to being attacked as anti-trade than as anti-Israel.
Quote:
“Is it possible to field a candidate that is true to the Democratic base yet is able to attract these defectors rather than drive them to a third-party protest candidate?”
Even getting them to a third-party protest is quite valuable. Some voters make their choice between a protest vote and a lesser-of-evils vote based in large part on how much they dislike the opposing major-party candidate. It also makes a big difference to how much the core constituencies campaign and donate. If you can de-energize the opponent’s base and energize yours, you’re well on the way to a win.
Posted by: Dan Wylie-Sears at September 11, 2003 09:36 PM
