Bush were shown raping infant boys on national television, then butchering them and eating their flesh with fava beans and a nice chianti, pretty much fed up with the Republican party's stewardship of this country. A lot can still happen between now and election day: swiftboating, another terrorist attack, a stock market crash, or any number of cataclysmic events that could affect Election Day. Let us not forget also that there are many "leaning Democratic" races that are within that six point "Georgia 2002" line that could just as easily result in a Republican win, to be spun by the talking heads as "a last-minute surge by evangelical voters."
But it seems that some prominent conservatives are already spinning huge Republican losses on Election Day as a positive.
Christopher Buckley:
What have they done to my party? Where does one go to get it back?
One place comes to mind: the back benches. It’s time for a time-out. Time to hand over this sorry enchilada to Hillary and Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden and Charlie Rangel and Harry Reid, who has the gift of being able to induce sleep in 30 seconds. Or, with any luck, to Mark Warner or, what the heck, Al Gore. I’m not much into polar bears, but this heat wave has me thinking the man might be on to something.
My fellow Republicans, it is time, as Madison said in Federalist 76, to “Hand over the tiller of governance, that others may fuck things up for a change.”
Bruce Bartlett:
As a conservative who’s interested in the long-term health of both my country and the Republican Party, I have a suggestion for the GOP in 2006: lose. Handing over at least one house of Congress to the other side of the aisle for the next two years would probably be good for everyone. It will improve governance in the country, and it will increase the chances of GOP gains in 2008.
[snip]
Finally, on a purely partisan level, I believe that loss of one or both houses will strengthen the Republican Party going into 2008. It will force a debate on issues that have been swept under the rug, such out-of-control government spending and the coziness between Republicans and K Street, home of Washington’s lobbying community. Afterwards, the party will emerge stronger, with better arguments for keeping control of the White House. Also, Democrats may well be placed under so much pressure from their left-wing fringe that they’ll be forced into politically self-destructive acts such as trying to impeach President Bush. Every Republican I know thinks Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are the best things they have going for them. Giving these inept leaders higher profiles would be a gift to conservatives everywhere.
Bruce Fein:
Republicans have shied from challenging Bush by placing party loyalty above institutional loyalty, contrary to the expectations of the Founding Fathers. They do so in the fear that embarrassing or discrediting a Republican president might reverberate to their political disadvantage in a reverse coat-tail effect.
Democrats, for their part, likewise place party above the Constitution, but their party loyalty at least creates an incentive to frustrate Bush’s super-imperial presidency. This could help to restore checks and balances. For the foreseeable future, divided government is the best bet for preserving both the letter and spirit of the Constitution. If Democrats capture the House or Senate in November 2006, the danger created by Bush with a Republican-controlled Congress would be mitigated or eliminated.
But that only applies to the next two years. If Hillary Clinton wins the White House in 2008, conservatives should be equally zealous for Republicans to recapture Congress.
On the surface, this sounds like the Mets saying "Let's lose Game 1 of the NLCS tomorrow night because it'll make us the underdog and everyone will root for us to make it to the World Series" -- in other words, ridiculous. But these conservatives are showing their hand in terms of their 2008 game plan: Let the Democrats take Congress so that we can blame THEM for everything Bush has fucked up since 2000, and we can take the presidency and both houses back then.
The problem is that this instinct may not be wrong.
Conservatives have long overstated the effectiveness of Democratic leadership to accomplish anything. Does anyone actually believe that this party which has been curled up in a fetal position in the corner ever since 9/11/01, is suddenly going to turn into a Colussus Bestride the Beltway simply because they have a majority? Does anyone actually believe that this most inept of parties is suddenly going to display flashes of spine simply because they have numbers? I hardly think so.
Nancy Pelosi's plan to "Drain the GOP Swamp" sounds like a pretty good starting point to me, but if it is enacted, here is how the GOP will spin it in 2008:
1. New rules to "break the link between lobbyists and legislation". Even if the Democrats themselves are willing to break that link (and I highly doubt it, given the realities of Washington politics), the 2008 spin will be that this is a "stifling of free speech."
2. Enacting all the recommendations made by the 9/11 Commission. With the U.S. Treasury pretty much broke from the Iraq War, I'm not sure how she's going to get the funding for this without either more deficit spending, or....
3. ....rolling back the Bush tax cuts for annual incomes of over $250K-$300K/year. History shows us that even if the Democrats raise taxes on high income Americans for programs that most Americans want, and even if they are raised for actual national security, when push comes to shove, the "tax and spend Democrat" meme trumps the "borrow and spend and make your kids pay the bill" meme every single time.
4. Raise the minimum wage to $7.25/hour. With the economy entering a slowdown, Republicans in 2008 will blame this minimum wage hike for a shrinking job market.
Some parts of the plan, such as expanding funding for stem cell research and broadening the types of research eligible for federal funding, are likely to have the support of most Americans, despite the inevitable Republican "Party of Death" rhetoric that will be designed to galvanize evangelical voters who equate embryonic stem cells with newborn infants. Allowing the government to negotiate with pharmaceutical firms for lower prices for Medicare patients is likely to pass muster too, though watch for Republicans to play to young parents by claiming that the Democrats are stealing your child's medicine to pay for drugs for greedy geezers.
None of the Republican distortions and spin that are likely to follow Democratic legislation in the next two years are insurmountable obstacles. But a SMART Democratic Party will anticipate them and be ready with talking-point rebuttals that will make sense to an incurious, inattentive American population that historically salivates when shown Red Republican Meat.
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire