« Sarah Palin’s Big Fat Book Deal
Kill Bill, Part III »



Why John Kerry’s Loss in 2004 Was “The Luckiest Thing to Happen to Democrats in 40 Years”

November 18th, 2008
By MICHAEL STICKINGS, Assistant Editor

Print Print

Duke political scientist David Rohde had an interesting piece at The New Republic yesterday on why the Democrats are much better off today because of Kerry’s loss to Bush in ‘04.

Basically, Rohde’s argument goes, “had Bush lost in 2004, the Democrats simply wouldn’t be anywhere near as powerful as they are now.” Kerry and Edwards would have faced “a hostile GOP Congress” unwilling to support their legislative agenda and, at best, they would have been “narrowly reelected” this year. And while it is true that “a second Bush term is a very steep price to pay for today’s success,” there is no denying just how successful the Democrats have become. “[T]he Bush administration survived, and the public grew increasingly disenchanted with its performance and the Republican brand.” The Democrats won back Congress in ‘06, adding to their majorities this year. And, of course, there was “Obama’s crushing White House victory.” In addition, the Democrats have a “new, mammoth fundraising advantage” over the Republicans:

It will take time to discover whether the developments in 2006 and 2008 constitute an enduring pro-Democratic shift in the electorate, rather than just a transitory negative reaction to Bush and the GOP. But the benefits the Democrats have realized from 2006 and 2008 — the ample mandate and the majorities the Democrats now possess — have put the party on the path toward substantial progress in its policy goals. And if John Kerry and John Edwards had found their way into office four years ago, they would have found a much more difficult, possibly impossible, road ahead of them.


In other words, Kerry simply might not have been able to get much done (though he likely would have provided much better leadership on Iraq and Katrina). Now, though, Obama comes into office with an impressive victory behind him, a clear mandate for change (in a liberal direction), significant Democratic majorities in Congress, and a rejuvenated and re-empowered Democratic Party. There was hope in ‘04, if not as much this year, but there is now the opportunity, as there wasn’t back then, to move forward not just on Iraq but on health care, education, energy, global warming, and tax policy, and well as to address the current financial crisis in a meaningful way.

I hesitate to say this, given how much I supported Kerry in ‘04 and continue to admire him, and given how terrible the last four years have been, but I suspect that Professor Rohde is right: For the Democrats, and for those of us who support them, things have turned out for the best.

Hopefully.

(Cross-posted from The Reaction.)



This entry was posted on Tuesday, November 18th, 2008 at 12:45 pm and is filed under Barack Obama, 2004 Elections, John Kerry, George W. Bush, 2008 Elections, Politics. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Viewing 5 Comments

 
close Reblog this comment
Powered by Disqus · Learn more
blog comments powered by Disqus

« Sarah Palin’s Big Fat Book Deal
Kill Bill, Part III »


By posting comments on The Moderate Voice you are acknowledging and agreeing to the following general comments policy:

(1) The Moderate Voice's comments are hosted by Disqus (http://disqus.com). If your comment doesn't appear immediately, please be patient since it is an off-site system.

(2) All e-mail received from readers by The Moderate Voice is considered intended for publication unless otherwise indicated in the initial message from the writer. Please do not send us attachments unless you contact us and we agree to it.

(3)The Moderate Voice reserves the right to edit all e-mail and posted comments for content, clarity, and length.

(4) Our comment space is reserved for comments that relate to a post's topic. You should not reprint lengthy text from your own works or those of others, including news articles. You MAY link to them.

(5) Comments that are abusive, offensive, contain profane or racist material or violate the terms of service for this blog's host provider will be removed and the author(s) banned from future comments. Such comments also violate the very SPIRIT of this site -- which was created to encourage thoughtful and vigorous discussion among readers who may share differing viewpoints.

(6) All points of view are welcome on The Moderate Voice, with the following exceptions:

(a) Comments posted several times a day with the intent of dominating, re-directing or hijacking the thread by turning a discussion into the equivalent of a bitter shouting match.

(b) Comments posted several times a day that insult or call other commenters or blog writers names or repeatedly make the same point with the effect of or clear intent to annoy other commenters or blog writers.

(7) Name-calling, personal attacks, racist comments or use of profanity by any commenter, whether they are by persons who agree or disagree with the views expressed by The Moderate Voice will NOT be tolerated and will result in the deletion of the comment and the banning of the commenter's ISP address, without notice. In some cases a comment may be deleted and the writer will be given another chance. Commenters who virtually ASK The Moderate Voice to ban them by ignoring any warnings or daring TMV to ban them will quickly get their wish.

(8) Anonymous commenters should identify themselves with the same moniker, so readers know their comments are coming from a single individual. If they don't, they are subject to a banning.

(9)If we have problems with inappropriate or inflammatory comments from a commenter who it turns out gave a fake email address that person is subject to immediate banning.

(10) Quotes from material appearing on The Moderate Voice with attribution are allowed. Reprints are allowed only by permission from The Moderate Voice. You may request permission by e-mail.

(11) The Moderate Voice is a personal site. It is not the Government. It is NOT aligned with any political party. It is NOT promoting any specific candidate for office. It is not a public institution or a media organization. It is not a neutral site. It is intended to express and disseminate the authors' varying points of views. Writers on this weblog WILL take positions. It reserves the right to limit comments to those that, in its view, comport with its stated comment policy. Comments that do not comply are subject to deletion and banning of the author's ISP.

Disclaimer:

--Reading and posting comments at The Moderate Voice constitutes acknowledgment of and agreement to the terms outlined in this comment policy. This comment policy may be revised in part or in full at any time.

--All comments must comport with applicable state and federal laws. The Moderate Voice has no obigation to monitor, edit, censor, or take responsibility for comments. It may or may not act upon a violation of its comment policy once a suspected violation has been brought to its attention. Therefore, commenters are solely responsible for the content of their comments and should ensure that that their comments are lawful and fall within the stated guidelines of both The Moderate Voice and its hosting company.

--The Moderate Voice is not be responsible for injury or liability to any reader or commenter resulting from its own communications or those of commenters, that may be offensive, misleading, inaccurate, illegal, or otherwise unsuitable in the view of the reader. Readers and commenters further agree to indemnify and hold harmless The Moderate Voice from claims resulting from the use of any material appearing on The Moderate Voice which damages the reader, commenter or any other party.

--The Moderate Voice is not responsible for and might disagree with material posted in the comments section. While we strive for accuracy in our posts and DO correct errors, material posted by The Moderate Voice in its posts -- or those left by others in the comments section -- may or may not be accurate.

Read and Post at your own risk.