Two who are challenging the Don't-Mention-the-War Democrats

I'm Shocked! Shocked! Shocked! According to this Washington Post report today, a recent opinion poll
offered some hopeful signs for Bush and the Republicans as they prepare for the midterm elections. The big advantage that Democrats held on virtually every major issue has narrowed or reversed. On the question of which party is best able to handle the situation in Iraq, the Democrats' 14-point advantage in last month's Post-ABC poll has been cut in half; they now have a 47 percent lead over Republicans' 41 percent.
A month ago, Democrats held a five-point lead over Republicans on dealing with international terrorism. Republicans now hold a seven-point advantage. On the economy, the Democratic advantage has narrowed from 18 points to 13 points since May.

And the poll also found that the the
public gives both Bush and the Democrats low marks on having a plan for success in Iraq. Almost two in three (64 percent) said Bush does not have a clear plan, while almost three in four (71 percent) said the same about Democrats in Congress.

Interestingly enough,
The Post-ABC News poll found far more support for a deadline among Democrats than was reflected by Senate Democrats last week. Currently, 66 percent of all Democrats surveyed said they favor a deadline, up three percentage points from last December.
Even larger increases occurred among Republicans, 28 percent of whom now support a fixed timetable, up 10 points from December. The proportion of political independents favoring a firm date rose eight points, to 44 percent.

So... let's see. Is is possible that the results of this poll reflect the FAILURE by the "opposition party" to challenge President Bush's agenda in Iraq and present a coherent alternative? I think that is exactly the case.
One can debate whether the Democrats on Capitol Hill are not doing what they are suppposed to do because they are leaderless and incompetent or because many of them (the Don't-Don't-Mention-the-War Democrats) actually back much of what Bush is doing in Iraq. The Bottom Line is that the only way things are going to change is if Jim Webb in Virginia and Ned Lamont in Connecticut win in their respective senate races this year. Those who oppose the war and Bush's foreign policy should invest much of their efforts in these two races. These are the two important electoral battle-grounds as far as the issue of Iraq is concerned.
And if you want to cheer-up yourself, check-out all the great stuff that Dr. Strauss is posting on Stop The Spirit Of Zossen.


Anonymous said…
There is a strong faction of the Dem party that seems like it suports Bush's foreign policy, so long as they are allowed to maintain a semi-credibile public fiction that suggests that they opppose it. Not blessed with any particular knowledge or expetise - it was always surpising to find people who were very bright and very informed that claimed they were surprised by Bush's cherry picking, the intel 'errors' (if they only knew about curveball, if they only knew about Abu Graib, etc) - It always seemed like these people were kidding themselves - in some sort of kubuki way - Take for instance the many liberals who supported the war - not for Bush reasons - but with world weary reluctance, after reading books by pro war Dems like "Threatening Storm" - Now dems say they were 'wrong' - some were wrong - but some were were or mistaken on purpose. It seems that way == Even the best pro-war arguments were far inferior in quality to the kind of analysis that would be considered passable in law firms and inv. banks.
daveg said…
It is hard to say which of these campaigns is most likely to succeed. I think Ned Lamont has a very good chance of wining the Dem primary in CT. The question is whether Joe Lieberman will run as an independant and if he can win.

My answer is no and no, but I would not be suprised if he ran as an I.

I have no idea about the Virgina race. Democrats have won state wide offices in VA. But unseating an incumban like Allen will be tough.

Whatever you do, make a contribution to one of these two guys, and preferably both.
Anonymous said…
I've always thought well of Joe Lieberman as a person - it's a shame he that he has to be so erroneous on the key issue of Iraq - If Liberman loses (unlikely) he may get a slot with Bush admin.
Love said…
The US and Israel are now provoking Syria and the Palestinians into all out war in the Middle East in which the US will use weapons of mass destruction to conquer the Middle East, their plan in the first place.
Nell said…
Leon, I felt as you do about Webb until this Washington Post article appeared ('Webb Opposes Withdrawal Plan for U.S. Troops' June 24). Having worked for his primary election and given generously, I feel seriously let down.

I'd really appreciate your reaction to the article.

Popular posts from this blog

When will Israel attack Iran?

my new op-ed in Haaretz