October 31, 2003
Trick or Treat?
Halloween marks a true countdown to election day. In fact, by this time next year it will be two days until the 2004 election. So one has to wonder whether or not the American people are going to be tricked or treated next year. Is rhetoric against President Bush on the economy and Iraq/Afghanistan going to hold next year for whoever gets the nod from the Democrats? Will they actually have to start coming up with ideas other than socialized health care, raising taxes and pulling troops out of Iraq (if we are still there).
The sorry state of the Democrat party today, amplified by the fact that the economy is surging ahead, is really a kick in the head to the nine Presidential candidates. Ideological liberals have to be shaking their heads right now as nobody outside of populist candidates has a chance at the nod. Not that ideological conservatives (especially fiscal conservatives) have much to celebrate with President Bush. His expansion of the federal government is on target with Johnson’s and even with tax cuts, nothing is being done at the federal level to preclude spending.
Two excellent articles in the Washington Times gives an accurate view of the split going on right now and why the populists are going to win over the idealogues.
In the first one, Democrats Urged to Move to the Center, it demonstrates how much the Democrats are trying to become everything to everybody. Sen. Tom Daschel demonstrates this principle perfectly in this exerpt:
Earlier this month, Mr. Daschle and nine other Senate Democrats threw their support to a Republican bill that would protect gun manufacturers and dealers from liability lawsuits.For those railing for more gun control, this sends the wrong message that the Democrats are on their side. By abandoning their progressive stance on gun control, Democrats could alienate a lot of Michael Moore clones who would like to arrest gun makers for killing five year olds."The vast majority of gun owners, manufacturers and sellers are honest and law-abiding," Mr. Daschle said. "It is wrong, and it is a misuse of the civil justice system, to try to punish honest, law-abiding people for illegal acts committed by others without their knowledge or involvement."
This recent boost in the economy is already getting discredited by Democrats. They say that we have a long way to go and that is true. But proclaiming that the growth is insignificant is only going to hurt their cause and highlight a position that would take more money from citizens. This growth is extremely significant and jobless rates are now at a level that most agree is a recovery number (slightly below 400,000 claim to be jobless). Naysayers who are not cautious of their words could find them getting bit back by them next Halloween.
Those two articles highlighted by the article by David Remer about Democratic Senator Zell Miller endorsing President Bush shows that the Democrats are again repositioning themselves as centrists. This comes to no surprise since Democrats haven't seen a non-populist candidate get elected since before World War II. Kennedy, Johnson, Carter and especially Clinton are all known for being left leaning populists and the non-populists have been obliterated in the election (read McGovern and Mondale). Clark is a former Republican who within the last year, threw his support behind President Bush and then revoked it when it became politically inconvienient. Dean is more pro-gun than Bush. Gephardt and Lieberman took stands to both go to war in Iraq and fund it completely to the rally cry of the White House. Sen. Kerry and Edwards have been trying to bill themselves as the liberal solution but have seen their poll numbers drop as a result.
The Democrats are split in half and they have stayed that way since the 2002 election. This has allowed GOP victories by convincing populists to move to the right on key issues. Next Halloween, will the Democrats be tricked or treated? Or will they already be planning for their take over in 2008?
Posted by at October 31, 2003 02:05 PMWell the way I see it Bush as to create 3.3 million new American jobs, provide health care to 44 million uninsured Americans, cut the half a trillion dollar budget deficit, find massive stockpiles of WMD, Capture Saddam and Bin Ladin, stop the off shoring of American jobs and actually fund education in this country.
Or he should polish his resume for January 2005.
Posted by: Jake of 8bitjoystick.com at November 2, 2003 04:53 PMMaybe Democratic candidates need to buy some ruby slippers and come back down to reality.
Honestly, the only way Democrats are going to provide Health Care is to raise taxes substantially, something that is unpopular with most people.
I would also like to know how Preisdent Bush is directly responsible for 3.3 million jobs being lost? I honestly don’t know how any President can be held responsible for millions of jobs lost.
Seriously, if a Democrat can do all those things above without raising taxes to 50%, I will surly be amazed and would happily vote for them. My hunch is that they don’t have a clue how they can do all these things and it is an empty pipe dream.
Posted by: Lance T. Haun at November 3, 2003 12:31 AMLance,
You wrote:
Will they actually have to start coming up with ideas other than socialized health care, raising taxes and pulling troops out of Iraq (if we are still there).
Wake up call. Socialized health care, responsible taxation and getting out of Iraq are enough to vote Bush out.
Health care alone is enough.
Bushie done.
Jonesy
Posted by: Jonesy at November 3, 2003 11:41 AMJonesy,
Mondale lost in 84 on a pro-taxation stance (or call it responsible taxation). The Clinton’s watered down health care plan failed enormously under a Democrat majority. We might have considerably withdrawn troops by election day.
When are Democrats going to wake up and find that American’s can’t relate to them. Hell, over half of them don’t even know who they are. In fact, in a head to head matchup between any of the democratic candidates, Bush wins.
I can’t wait to see a McGovern-like concession speech in November 2004.
Posted by: Lance T. Haun at November 3, 2003 11:52 AMLance,
Troops out by next November? Ha! Rummy is still looking at plans to have 50,000 soliders there in 2005. http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2003/tr20031102-secdef0836.html
I know it would be good for the GOP to have the troops out next year, but the neocons you gave your party too don’t seem to care.
It’s a nice dream for you to have to think it will be a Bush vs. Mondale situation, but I think there are some key differences.
Pointing to past failures isn’t a good way to predict the future.
All anyone has to do is honestly answer “are you better off today than you were three years ago” and very few other than the ultra-rich can honestly say “yes.”
Mondale got clocked during a time of percieved prosperity.
Dean (or any other Dem) has the benefit of running against a President that has been a disaster for the nation.
Assuming that there is a fair election (meaning the whiffs of ballot tampering and Diebold scandals aren’t true), it will be a very interesting day for America.
I don’t think there has ever been a President as loathed as Bush is by so many.
We’ll see. I think old Georgie is in for a rude awakening if someone as fearless as Dean ends up debating him.
J
Actually Lance the cost for Dean’s health care plan is less than a third of Bush’s tax cuts for the rich. We are fed up with having a third rate medical care system for our working class and it is going to cost Bush the election.
Posted by: Jake of 8bitjoystick.com at November 3, 2003 02:24 PMJonesy, I think you misread the statement. You can clearly read that is one of the plans he is considering but it is not authoritative. The 50,000 figure was actually from a Washington Post article, one that specifically mentioned that Rumsfield had not approved that plan.
Any historian would disagree with the fact that history doesn’t have a tendency to repeat itself. What you and many pro-tax advocates don’t realize is that swing voters aren’t going to go for it. Proof can be shown with Mondale’s failure, with the resurgence of a Republican dominated congress in 1994 and now with a President who has not raised taxes. Perception will always be a greater factor than results. If people percieve that things will do better under Bush, they will vote for it.
By the way, there is plenty to refute that there has been no President loathed by so many. One could easily argue Hoover and more recently Carter have had much lower approval rates.
Jake, the Dean health care plan is a sham with loopholes all over the place and it is still expensive. That is why people rejected Clinton’s plan and that’s why people will reject this. Comparing it to tax cuts is a misnomer because instead of taking more money from the people, it is giving money back to the people. Let’s look at other examples of universal health care and see where it takes us. Everybody covered by sub-par plans, questionable service and the best doctors moving to economies where they can make more than a steel worker.
Posted by: Lance T. Haun at November 3, 2003 04:04 PM
