----- Original Message ----- From: "Nick Arnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2004 9:58 AM Subject: Re: The Prospect on the Future of the Democrats
> JDG wrote: > > An interesting... and in my opinion all too gloomy for the Democrats... > > assessment of the future of the Democratic Party. > > From the article: > > > During the fall campaign, many people said that this election was > > “the most important of our lives.” It was, and when the Democrats > > lost it, an era came to a close. George W. Bush’s 51 percent of > > the vote may seem too slim a margin to produce conservative hegemony, > > and ordinarily it wouldn’t have that effect -- except that Republicans > > have now consolidated control of the government. > > This writer seems to be endorsing rejection of the interests of 49 > percent of the population. Talk about votes not being counted... This > sounds like the election outcome was 51-0, not 51-49. > > The idea that this couldn't easily swing back the other way seems > ridiculous to me -- unless the "winners" abuse their power so much that > there can never be a fair election or a fair courtroom again. > Am I crazy, or do I keep hearing people from the GOP saying that the > Democrats will never win again? Now I'm wondering if this is yet > another campaign orchestrated by Rove, etc. It would make sense -- few > want to be associated with losers, especially if it looks like they're > perpetual losers. I think focusing on just the White House race misses the point. The Democrats are not doing well across the board. GWB should have been a weak president because he bungles so much in office. Gautam rated him D-, and I wouldn't call Gautam a raving liberal. :-) In '00, the prevailing wisdom of the influence of the ecconomy on the presidential election would have indicated that the Democrats should have had a cake walk. Instead, it was a very close election. Looking elsewhere, the Democratic party is as weak as it has ever been since 1932 at a national level. The 55-45 advantage in the Senate is as large as the Republicans have had during that time. Their 25 seat majority in the House is not as strong as their '95-'97 majority of 26, but it is close. Couple that with the presidency, and their ability to get legislation through the house during the last term, and its a potent force at the national level. Governorships also do not favor the Democrats, with the most likely outcome of the Republicans gaining one governorship for a 29-21 advantage. The state legislatures remain balanced, with Republicans having one more state assembly majority, and the number of state Senate majorities tied. Other ways of looking at the race are also not very impressive. The last Democrat president who was not a Southerner was Kennedy. The last one who was not an Evangelical was Johnson. It's been 40 years since Johnson has been elected. Given the number of judgeships, including the Supreme Court, that are up now, it is quite possible that GWB will put his stamp on the Judiciary for years to come. So, while the numbers aren't as bad as they were for the Republicans in the '30s, they are definately going in the wrong direction for the Democrats. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
