Dubya: The Invisible Hand in Iowa
There was but a single reference to him in the two lead New York Times stories today and scant mention elsewhere, but George Bush was the invisible hand in the Iowa caucuses.
The deeply unpopular president has energized Democrats and nowhere more so than in the campaign of Barack Obama, whose message of change drew in substantial numbers of first-time, young and independent voters in Iowa and convincing caucus victory sets him up for a showdown with the long presumptive frontrunner – Hillary Clinton – next Tuesday in New Hampshire.
Bush’s influence on the Republican side is starkly different. Besides there being less than half as many Republican caucusers last night in Iowa than on the Democratic side, the president will dog the candidates and eventual nominee all the way to the November election, yet few of the GOP wannabes have broken ranks with him for fear of alienating the party’s shrunken base.
As far fetched as it may have seemed until last night, Obama now has a real shot at becoming the Democratic nominee.
That in turn sets up a perverse dynamic for the Republicans: The question will become less whether an African American can be elected president than how far down George Bush will drag the GOP nominee.
Memo to the Republican Party: It’s time to panic.
24 Responses to “Dubya: The Invisible Hand in Iowa”
I always thought that the Republicans would become irrelevant sometime between 2020 and 2030 due to nothing more than changing demographics. But the total incompetence of the Bush Administration has moved up the date by about twenty years.
The candidates have the problem in that the Republicans now have no credibility on issues like fiscal conservatism or smaller government and their own records reflect the same lack of credibility.
12 years ago, then President Clinton proclaimed that the era of big government is over. Now, the new era of big government is just beginning. In such a change of affairs, no group that can be affected by the government can be seen as being on the outside. Ever group had better position itself to function in an era of a massive increase in the size of government while the Democrats dominate the federal government and most state governments.
But the total incompetence of the Bush Administration has moved up the date by about twenty years.
Shaun answers your assumption.
whose message of change drew in substantial numbers of first-time, young and independent voters in Iowa
It is about victory first and foremost. It is about the perception that the GOP is incapable of running the country. It is about the view that Barack Obama will represent change in a system that is controlled not by a president but by Congress.
I offer you Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid as opposed to the two conservative Republicans who used to have the job and what happened?
Nothing. Nothing got done. By Design. The democrats didnt want us out of Iraq. Why? They would have no selling point. They would have to discuss more then ONE issue in which time after time they get pummelled at the voting booths over.
Shaun understands this. It is why he never discusses anything except the WAR. It is why TMV does not discuss the issues. They only discuss DUBYA and the War.
This election is about winning. The antiwar machine of the democratic party was about winning and they were forced to manufacture reasons to convince the American public that the war on terror was a failure because we had not accomplished specific goals that THEY began defining.
This election is about Winning. The last congress was about winning. Nothing matters but to win. Barack Obama might very well sweep into the White HOUSE exactly as JIMMY CARTER did………..clueless……and with a mandate for change that nearly destroyed the free world along with America herself.
So bad were times under Carter my friends that President Carter even gave a prime time speech in which he Told Americans that they should not be so depressed and fearful and to Cheer up please….things will get better. But do not forget that things can only be better if you continue to let the Democrats be in control.
Barack Obama is one of about 40 presidents who has promised change. I find it amazing that anyone really believes that things will change under him in a governmental system that is out of control and has no ability to be other then its own living, breathing entity.
Yet……………look who swept him into the lead…….substantial numbers of first-time, young and independent voters
These young voters also will see their hopes dashed and join the rest of the cynical Americans who vote for competency instead of another smiling face offering another smiling LIE.
somebody,
As the Democratic Party becomes the one dominate party, they will not have to worry about being punished at the ballot box. do you really think that the majors of Chicago or Detroit worry about being punished at the ballot box? As the Republican party finishes its collapse, the Democrats can do what they want because they will have enough supported locked in that their decisions will not matter.
When you consider that over 100 Democratic Congressmen are running unopposed in 2008 up from about 75 in 2006, it is easy to see that the Democratic party will soon be immune to ballot box changes (See Mass, Maryland, DC, RI, and Delaware as examples of such areas that are immune to performance at the ballot box. Does anyone doubt that after redistricting occurs in 2010 that the Democratic Party will have 150 or more totally safe seats?
Does anyone doubt that as the Hispanic and black populations grow relative to whites, that many more safe districts will be created?
Does anyone doubt that anyone in their 20′s who is interested in politics will have to be a Democratic because there is no future with the Republicans?
The incompetence and stupidity of the Bush Administration has been so bad that they have done almost nothing that a mainstream Republican candidates would have proposed during an election but they have horrible approval ratings, a collapsing political party, and no next generation of candidates to fall back on. At least if the Republicans were going to get hammer in politics, maybe they should have at least balanced the budget and shrunk the government instead of the mess that Bush is leaving behind.
If you want competency, you make damn sure you never vote for a Republican. The last competent Republican to be elected to the White House was Nixon and that was practically 40 years ago.
SD:
LOL – When Shaun or someelse says this it’s BDS “all the time”.
Somebody:
WTF – It’s a Republican strategy, the minority party is Republican and filibusters are up.
Shaun – On Obama and cynicism, Bush is an example of aristocracy and Obama is ACTUALLY an exampleof meritocracy. The Republican party attacks affirmative action and demands meritocracy over nepotism and aristocracy.
Wait a month and see if change matters. Before ANY votes were cast, the elite MSM (Ivy League and beltway, not Liberal) spoke of inevitability of Rudy and Hillary, well elite media and party brokers were wrong in Iowa. These same people laughed off Carter and Reagan. The Dick Morris’ and Joe Trippi’s are Mr. Morris’ “first name”.
If you think that demographics is the problem, there is a simple solution, find upper-middle class Blacks, Hispanics, Asians and recruit them to run as Republicans and get your white Republicans to vote for them.
If on the other hand the problem is that Republicans have been a bunch of racist running on the southern strategy for the last thirty years, well you reap what you sow.
[...] candidates makes this claim: “GOP race in total disarray.” At TMV earlier this morning, Shaun Mullen suggested it’s time for the GOP to panic. I respect the Politico and Shaun immensely, but [...]
Somebody said:
Are you really saying that we’re still in Iraq because the Democrats want us there?
That’s the reason?
PS I think having gotten us out of Iraq might have been a fairly strong selling point for the Democrats. Maybe the President was afraid of letting that happen?
don,
Over 90% of elected Hispanics are Democrats. Virtually 100% of elected blacks are Democrats. Why would anyone with enough ambition to run for office who is black or Hispanic run as a Republican when so few blacks or Hispanics will vote for any Republican?
also, I find it humorous that the Democratic party screams racism when it was Republicans who crossed over in the Democratic Primary to vote racist, bigot Cynthia McKinney out of office twice. The Democratic voters were content to leave her in office.
also, I find it humorous that the Democratic party screams racism when it was Republicans who crossed over in the Democratic Primary to vote racist, bigot Cynthia McKinney out of office twice. The Democratic voters were content to leave her in office.
SD- And you know this —-how???LOL
kritt,
Because Cynthia McKinney filed a lawsuit claiming that the voting rights of black Democrats were violated because white Republicans could cross over and vote in the Democratic primary. The Republicans knew that they would never be able to beat McKinney in a general election so Rebublicans crossed over and voter for his least liberal black, Democratic opponent during the Democratic Primary.
Where are the statistics of how many of each party voted and what race they were? Mckinney is a nutcase- who would file a lawsuit at the drop of a hat- so that tells me nothing. Don’t you think many black Democrats were embarrassed by her as well? Her primary opponent was a black male, if I remember, and her district is largely black and Democratic—I don’t think there are enough white Republicans there to defeat her by themselves.
WTF – It’s a Republican strategy, the minority party is Republican and filibusters are up.
Which proves exactly the point I was making. Nothing gets done no matter which side is in the minority. Which will further prove the point I was making in that when Obama gets into office……..nothing will get done because……….Politics has become about social agendas instead of the business of running this country.
Its not a republican strategy. Its a governmental strategy. Read up on the history of Filibusters and cloture in congress. You will find that those who have most actively employed the strategy are democrats, closely followed by their fellow Republicans who are learning fast. In fact if you remember things got so bad that Bill Frist the GOP leader in the Senate was going to try to ban filibustering on judicial nominees.
Why? Because politics has become about social agendas instead of running the nation as a business.
Trolls:
Would it be too much to ask if we took the comments thread back to the actual post?
Thanks in advance.
Shaun ,
There is no strategy or plan that the Republicans can do that will help them. They are a minority party that appeals to demographic groups that are shrinking. Any attempt to appeal to core Democratic groups will fail as surely as President Bush’s immigration reform (which of course reads almost identically to Obama’s immigration reform plan except that I doubt any Democratic Administration would ever implement or fund the enforcement mechanisms.
If Senator Obama wins in New Hampshire, the United States is looking at the longest transition period ever (over one year) since there is no way a Republican is going to win this year.
Shaun, your ideology and your politics lead you time after time to throw logic away (don’t worry; the Left is the home for such behavior and you have plenty of company). It is impossible to conclude from last night’s caucuses here that the GOP needs to panic.
The only developing panic is among the “Country Club Republican” faction, and Wall Street and the business community, that if Huckabee were to continue to rise (which I doubt he will), something would have to be done to sabotage his campaign, if not shove him into a corner called the Vice Presidency, hopefully to keep the Religious Right votes coming in.
And these people aren’t yet truly starting to panic.
We’ll see if Giuliani or Romney (not the GOP as a whole) start to panic if they sink below McCain or Huckabee after Feb 5.
DLS:
A fair analysis. Thank you for getting the comments back on track.
DLS,
A Huckabee at the top of the ticker would be harmful for any of the down ticket candidates. The last few Republicans in New England would be gone along with the last few in the Mid-Atlanic. A Huckabee candidacy makes 60 seats for the Democrats a greatly possibility.
I just want to address something mentioned earlier, briefly. The real key has been entitlements (the essence of the modern welfare state), and the underlying demographics are not limited to race and ethnicity when it comes to the Democrats’ advantage.
Just wait until the Baby Boomers have retired in substantial numbers and they’re drawing Social Security checks and enjoying Medicare. Do you think they’ll want to see these programs threatened?
That’s all I have to say about the real future demographic issue.
No problem — also, it remains to be seen how Bush affects the GOP candidates, which already are weak, don’t forget. Will he or won’t he appear with one or more candidates? Will his appearance be solicited (or avoided or even refused)?
DLS,
The demographic is that when people talk about independent voters, they are really talking about middle class and upper middle class whites. they are the ones that elections are fought over since they swing between parties. Blacks and Hispanics are incredibility loyal Democratic voters. Those two groups are growing relative to whites.
Eventually, national politics will resemble state wide politics in places like Maryland (a state that is one third black). The Republicans will be face with getting such a high percentage of the white vote to win, that they will stand no chance of winning.
The growth of Hispanic and blacks as a percentage of the population ensure that the Democrats will be the one, dominate party (See California).
The elderly are another problem. See Japan or northern Europe to find out what can happen to countries where the mean age keeps getting higher. Eventually the tax rates get so high that they cannot produce the revenues to fund the welfare states and/or the economy slows down due to the Granny effect.
Yes. That will happen here, too; our problems will be less bad than Europe’s or Japan’s, but they will be substantial. Replacement migration to boost the labor force will be constrained politically. Taxpayers will be fighting the retirees.
It’s inconceivable in modern times to have substantial increases in Social Security benefit levels (cost growth will be required, along with benefit reductions in the form of realistic 70-plus retirement age settings), but I have raised this issue ever so gently once in a while because the income replacement rate of Social Security is quite low, I believe in the forties per cent. (It is particularly a bad payoff for those of us paying higher taxes.)
Note also that I doubt Bush will drag down what are already known to be weak GOP candidates, especially when GOP-leaning voters in the sixties per cent have already said they want a change, and I am confident most such voters assume there will be such a change.
It would help if Republicans started recruiting Black & Hispanic candidates. There has to be minority upper middle class voters who would be willing to vote Republican if given a reason and aren’t treated as interlopers.