Richard Tafoya
Aug 10th, 2006, 11:14 AM
The idea that voters may actually be motivated to go to the polls and remove incumbents from office based on a few, clearcut issues is terrifying to both Democrats and Republicans currently in office.
But that's exactly what's happening this year, based on this week's primary races.
The fact that those same voters overwhelmingly see Bush administration policies across the spectrum as failed and failing shines a bright light on those that enabled his misadventures for these past few years. They can spin this all they want as "but Bush isn't running," but the fact is that a weak crop of legislators on both sides of the aisle (though primarily the majority GOP batch) enabled and didn't challenge those policies when they could have made a difference.
So the Lieberman vote and others to come are ultimately not about handing the control of the Democratic party over to some fringe peacenik faction, as the Bush administration will continue to spin it, but about demanding accountability for weak representation in Washington.
DailyKos:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/8/10/123510/619
Chuck Todd's latest column (http://nationaljournal.com/todd.htm) can't be making any Republicans happy.
Hotline researchers [...] can't find evidence of any primary night (in a non-redistricting year) producing three incumbent losses. And these losses were across the ideological and geographic spectrum. Each one individually can be explained away (moderate Joe Schwarz only won his first race because the conservative vote was split, not so this year; Cynthia McKinney is, well, Cynthia McKinney; and Joe Lieberman found himself on the wrong end of a divisive issue in the wrong year).
And yet, they all lost to candidates promising to do the same thing: change Washington. Change the spending habits, or change the foreign policy, or simply change personal behavior.
As I've said about 256,776 times this year, lazy media pundits who try to paint this in ideological terms are missing the boat. The sentiment is "insider versus outsider." It's "crashing the gate." People are sick of the capital stinking up the country.
Many are discouraged and have found it easier to tune out politics. But not the partisans -- they're motivated and eager to fight for change. So November will be a base election, with the dejected casual voters out of commission, and elections decided on which party can best turn out their core supporters.
Democrats have made strong gains in that front the past couple of weeks. The Lieberman defeat has electrified activists nationwide, showing them that the most powerful, entrenched establishment figures are not safe from people-power. Tuesday wasn't a morale boost, it was proof that we could accomplish the politically impossible.
In addition, the Democrats have finally come together around a common agenda. The domestic stuff is good, sure (e.g. stem cell research, energy, etc), but this election will turn on Iraq. And the caucus is finally united on a Iraq policy -- bring our troops home. And suddenly, even casual liberal voters are becoming "base" voters.
Speaking of the suburbs, the turnout among the sometimes casual suburban liberal [in the Connecticut primary] should make Democrats happy. If these folks show up in big numbers in the fall, there are at least 10 House seats Democrats will pick up east of the Mississippi. The angry suburbanite is the difference between Democrats winning control of Congress or just coming close.
We're on the right track. Lieberman is a nuisance until someone finds a graceful way for him to exit stage right. But aside from that blemish, we're on the road to some really great things.
But that's exactly what's happening this year, based on this week's primary races.
The fact that those same voters overwhelmingly see Bush administration policies across the spectrum as failed and failing shines a bright light on those that enabled his misadventures for these past few years. They can spin this all they want as "but Bush isn't running," but the fact is that a weak crop of legislators on both sides of the aisle (though primarily the majority GOP batch) enabled and didn't challenge those policies when they could have made a difference.
So the Lieberman vote and others to come are ultimately not about handing the control of the Democratic party over to some fringe peacenik faction, as the Bush administration will continue to spin it, but about demanding accountability for weak representation in Washington.
DailyKos:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/8/10/123510/619
Chuck Todd's latest column (http://nationaljournal.com/todd.htm) can't be making any Republicans happy.
Hotline researchers [...] can't find evidence of any primary night (in a non-redistricting year) producing three incumbent losses. And these losses were across the ideological and geographic spectrum. Each one individually can be explained away (moderate Joe Schwarz only won his first race because the conservative vote was split, not so this year; Cynthia McKinney is, well, Cynthia McKinney; and Joe Lieberman found himself on the wrong end of a divisive issue in the wrong year).
And yet, they all lost to candidates promising to do the same thing: change Washington. Change the spending habits, or change the foreign policy, or simply change personal behavior.
As I've said about 256,776 times this year, lazy media pundits who try to paint this in ideological terms are missing the boat. The sentiment is "insider versus outsider." It's "crashing the gate." People are sick of the capital stinking up the country.
Many are discouraged and have found it easier to tune out politics. But not the partisans -- they're motivated and eager to fight for change. So November will be a base election, with the dejected casual voters out of commission, and elections decided on which party can best turn out their core supporters.
Democrats have made strong gains in that front the past couple of weeks. The Lieberman defeat has electrified activists nationwide, showing them that the most powerful, entrenched establishment figures are not safe from people-power. Tuesday wasn't a morale boost, it was proof that we could accomplish the politically impossible.
In addition, the Democrats have finally come together around a common agenda. The domestic stuff is good, sure (e.g. stem cell research, energy, etc), but this election will turn on Iraq. And the caucus is finally united on a Iraq policy -- bring our troops home. And suddenly, even casual liberal voters are becoming "base" voters.
Speaking of the suburbs, the turnout among the sometimes casual suburban liberal [in the Connecticut primary] should make Democrats happy. If these folks show up in big numbers in the fall, there are at least 10 House seats Democrats will pick up east of the Mississippi. The angry suburbanite is the difference between Democrats winning control of Congress or just coming close.
We're on the right track. Lieberman is a nuisance until someone finds a graceful way for him to exit stage right. But aside from that blemish, we're on the road to some really great things.