[Welcome to James Wolcott's readers! Feel free to gloat but do try to be respectful. For a follow-up on this post, take a look at Post-Post Election Reflections and please feel free to join in the discussion there.]
The Republicans have done more than enough to deserve losing the elections tomorrow. Of course, the same is typically said of any party that has controlled the House, Senate, and Executive branch for any extended period of time. To a certain extent, this is inevitable. We elect fallible men and women to powerful government positions, discouraging all but the most narcissistic and opportunistic by the viciousness of our political discourse, and then wonder why they don't solve all the problems they promised to take care of in their allotted 2, 4, or 6 years. It is a wonder any progress gets made in Washington.
That being said, the Democrats have had a unique opportunity for the last 6 years and have failed in every particular. When a party has lost all the important levers of power, they have a wonderful opportunity. Because they will have no responsibility to govern, they can cast a critical eye on the governing powers and articulate their opposition in ways that can mobilize their supporters. The classic recent case study would be the Gingrich Republicans of 1994. They not only capitalized on the growing discontent with Bill Clinton's "Big Government Liberalism" but actually put some thought into their response. The "Contract with America" was many things, but it most clearly was a well thought-out plan on how to leverage an election victory in ways which would bring the government more into conformity with the goals and aspirations of the Republican party. As with all things in politics, the Republican revolution was only partially successful, but it showed the benefits of being repudiated at the polls.
I am afraid the Democrats, because of several inherent limitations, have not availed themselves of their opportunity, and as a result are likely going to be disappointed tomorrow, and in the event that they actually win the seats they are hoping for, they and the country are going to be very sadly disappointed in the next two years.
For reasons of money and passion, the core of the Democratic party has been largely inhabited by the left-overs from the heady days of Watergate and the anti-Vietnam left, and their spiritual heirs in the "net roots." These people are true believers, although it is often difficult to determine in what they believe; nonetheless they believe it passionately. They believe that "Bush lied" us into a misguided war and that globalization exploits workers here and abroad. They believe in Abortion on demand under all circumstances and that the rich are too rich and the poor are too poor and the best response is to take from the rich and give to the poor. Unfortunately, such feelings do not translate well into a political platform that can be supported by most Americans.
Thus far, Iraq has been the Democrats' single best weapon to use against the Republicans. For the last few years, the Democrats could have been honing a message to present to the American people. They could have explained how we could win this war by changing tactics in Iraq; they could have explained just why it is they believe that by re-deploying our troops out of Iraq, we would be safer. Rather than engage the arguments, they have merely asserted them. This works for many people who are tired of the war, tired of seeing "crazy Arabs" on TV behaving violently toward each other and toward us, and are looking to wash their hands of the entire venture. Yet even for those of us who are tired and feel each American death as the loss of a world, the worst outcome of the Iraq War would be to lose it. Our enemies tell us time and again that if we leave prematurely, as we did in Beirut and Mogadishu, they will see it as a glorious victory. Abandoning the battle field has never made a Nation more secure or its enemies less powerful.
Democratic politicians must know this. Either they know it and desire an American loss (which would be consistent with that part of the Left that finds America at fault for all the ills of the world) or they have convinced themselves that history is wrong and by leaving Iraq we will avoid all the disastrous consequences that will flow from such a decision. Alternately, they have convinced themselves that the Bush administration is such a danger to America and the world that literally anything is preferable; even with all the risks of losing the war, in this case, it will be worth it to take down the Bush administration. Finally, there are those who are merely opportunists; they care neither for Iraq nor for America's future, but put their own political aspirations above the good of the country. They are beneath contempt.
Ultimately, the Democrats have to end up disappointed. If they fail to gain the victories they so fervently desire (and believe just as fervently they deserve), after all the cries of fraud and fascism fade, they will have nothing. If they win the House and/or the Senate, they will have even less. Having no real policies except anti-War, Bush animus, the true believers who control the party will demand their pound of flesh; the investigations of Bush and his administration will be the story of the next two years, egged on by their willing accomplices in the MSM. Revenge will be felt as sweet even if the country must pay a high price.
The upshot is that if they are able to convince enough people that they should replace the Republicans (and there are many who believe that divided government is ideal) then they will be truly disappointed and disappointing. No one wants to elect a Democratic House or Senate to have them spend the next two years trying to do to Bush what they believe was done to Clinton.
The worst pity is that partially paralyzing the executive branch during war time is a sure way to get people killed.
The best long term outcome for the Democrats tomorrow would be complete repudiation, in which case they could retreat to their safe houses and think tanks and develop a coherent platform; they could then re-enter the political arena in 2008 as a responsible political party.
The second best outcome for the Democrats would be to lose both Houses of Congress by narrow margins so they can continue carping from the sidelines without having to take any responsibiliy for the outcome.
The best outcome for the Republicans would be for the Democrats to take the House but not the Senate. In that case, the worst excesses of the Democrats would be on display without them having the power to do much damage to the Republicans; that would enhance Republican chances in 2008.
The best outcome for the country would be for the Congress to remain in Republican hands, even if those hands are often inept, so that we have a chance to win, or at least not precipitously lose, the war.
Recent Comments