Skip to main content

View Diary: A Sea Change In Store for US Foreign Policy? (256 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I think what could change is the Democratic Party (5+ / 0-)

    especially if Obama got a "No" and then bombed Syria anyway.

    The Democratic-voting public is in no mood for what Margaret Carlson thinks of as "courage". I think this means the outcome of that vote is a "No".

    But.

    Those voters also seem to strongly believe that a "No" ends the chances of a bombing or cruise missile theater.

    If the "No" comes, and the bombs fall anyway?

    Jesus. The Democratic Party better invest in fucking helmets.

    I think there would be a revolt at the base level, and even outside the Democratic base as people who were against the bombing seek payback on the Democratic pols who voted in favor.

    At that point, the best thing that could happen to the White House is that the idiot Teahadi try to impeach him over it. Which would allow the White House, and the Democratic Party, to make all the time between now and 2014 about punishing the Right's overreach, not theirs.

    If not, I would expect the White House to be punished by proxy. You don't want to be a Democrat who voted for the resolution at that point.

    The polling on taking military action being so firmly against, and so much so across ideological and party demographics, is a political intelligence test.

    You have to be fucking stupid to think that you can vote against that high a level of sentiment against and not pay a price for it down the line. This is why I think the Presidents job is getting harder, and not easier, as things sink in. There is a screaming neon sign flashing that says "you vote for that shit at your fucking peril, dumbass".

    If the vote is "No" and the bombs fly anyway?

    Somebody is going to pay.

    I suspect the Village and the foreign policy establishment would herald that at a triumph for the President in the short term.

    And then?

    You could see those Democrats who did vote to bomb Syria pay the price. Either via primary or by outright loss of their seats.

    And the same Village elites who were happy Obama bombed anyway would be lamenting that even more of their favorite kinds of Democrats were no longer around to hippy punch the liberals with them.

    The Democrats left are going to be more anti-war and more alternative approach to foreign policy than the Democratic Party that was just a year before.

    The Democrats who are losing via blowback are the Blue Dogs, the Third Wayers, the Post-Partisanites for the most part. The GOP's House redistricting took a huge toll on their ranks, as did losing because they are not Democrats that Democrats get passionate enough about to go above and beyond to fund, fight for, and save. The blowbacks are the Very Serious People types. Not traditional or liberal Democrats.

    I also think bombing Syria, especially against the overwhelming sentiment of the Democratic Party rank and file and the base, is a ticket to a rank and file revolt.

    To the point where even Hilary Clinton might be having to face a strong outsider in the Democratic Primary, rather than a cleared field or just other establishment Dems like Joe Biden.

    I am a Loco-Foco. I am from the Elizabeth Warren wing of the Democratic Party.

    by LeftHandedMan on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 10:11:44 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site