Skip to main content


Firstly, let me point out that I support Gary Hooser for HI-02, the seat Ed Case (D and Iraq War Supporter) is vacating to attack Dan Akaka (D and Peace Supporter) in a primary challenge from the right. I've met Gary, know him, trust him, and seen him practice what he preaches.  E.g. the Sierra Club agrees with me that Gary means what he says about protecting the environment.

Gary was just endorsed by the Sierra Club, which to me means something.  Click on the endorsement image to see a letter by Gary on the endorsement.

But back on topic, as HiD has said:

[Hawaii]'s a long way from liberal/progressive.  I call it Kansas with a beach for a reason.


(also at MLW)

Here's why.

One: anyone conservative, even a little, that is also practical, even a little, with the exception of Lingle, has become a Democrat, because only Democrats could get elected in the past. Thus, we have Ed Case, a fairly conservative Democrat was able to take the seat after Patsy Mink, progressive hero, passed away. Many progressives that supported Case were surprised at what they supported, the reason, simply, one assumes the "D" means something more than it can possibly mean, one assumes the conventional wisdom of a "deep blue state" means more than it possibly can. This conservativism in the Dem party weakens the state, and makes Dems and Republicans seem more alike.

Two: Lingle (R) took over for a Democrat, basically as a compassionate conservative. She's a "liberal" conservative, and few would deny that... except me, insofar as she champions and loves Bush, her "liberalism" is really a part of moving the country to the right.  The thing is, Lingle is UBERPOPULAR, running in near 70% approval in the few polls we have to go by.

Three: Lingle won against Mazie Hirono, former Lieutenant Governor and primary competitor now for HI-02 due, few would deny, to corruption that surfaced in the previous Democratic Governors campaign.  The corruption is... to me more like stagnation. I don't think there is an evil inset corruption or anything like that, but there is (was?) a good old boys network that has had moments of good old fashioned corruption. People don't trust that, because they know someone's cousin is getting government contracts. We have no laurels to rest on as Democrats in Hawaii as a result.

Four: Because of Democratic domination, the only conservatives impractical enough to run as Republicans (besides Lingle) have generally been real right wing nuts. This has helped perpetuate Democratic Party dominance. Lingle's appearance and popularity is going to put an end to this. If soft-conservative Republicans like Lingle start running (and Ed Case is a perfect example of the kind of person that would be running as a Lingle Republican), Hawaii residents, who have a lot of social, racial, and pro-military conservativism will have an alternative to vote for.

Five: We don't give a damn. Kos has said, for example:

Lingle ain't going anywhere as she remains one of the most popular governors in the country, 67-27 approvals in the latest SUSA poll.

And given the rampant corruption of Hawaii Democrats, I don't think I blame island voters for wanting a bit of checks and balances. I keep hoping this forces the party to clean up its act, though our track record in other states (like MA, RI, NJ, and IL) isn't very encouraging. One-party dominance encourages all manners of abuses.

I can keep hoping, but not with any confidence. The recipe kos describes is one in which my prediction (Republican Dominance in Hawaii) is the logical consequent. Hawaii is very loyal to incumbents, if we get Republicans without that changing... well I'm sure you see the point.

And if Case wins against Akaka, you have another conservative from a blue state... breaking even on Lieberman... assuming Lieberman loses. If Lieberman wins it's a net loss, not even counting the other conservatives we are eagerly taking on board this cycle in our desperation. You can argue we have no choice... but whatever you argue, we are eagerly helping the Democratic Party move right.  Yes yes, you have good reasons... but they don't allow you to deny that what you are doing for a good reason, you really are doing: move the Democratic Party eagerly to the right.

Honestly, I'm not sure there is anything we can do about this. Now I've met Gary, I like him, I think he will be a good representative, but also, my support comes from this dynamic. Gary is the only candidate from an "outer" island, he's a solid Democrat, he has democratic contacts, but he's further from that machine. People like Gary could re-construct the Hawaii Democratic party and seprate it from the stagnant Honolulu paternalism... but the party itself is unlikely to drive this, it would have to be driven from the outside.

More likely the Party will hold on until it goes down to Republicans, then try to run against the Republicans based on decades of Republican mismanagement of Hawaii.

The problem with that... we have to wait for decades of Republican mismanagement, during which you can expect Hawaiis resources to be spoiled, developments for the wealthy to drive down the standard of living of working class Hawaiians, continued problems with education and medical infrastructure. I far prefer Gary's vision of making Hawaii a center for renewable energy, environmental protection, and a study in medical infrastructure solving the problems of outer islands separated by ocean from our most modern facilities.

So I wish I had a solution that would work... I have a solution, but too many people would have to agree with me that don't (and there is even a slight possibility I'm wrong (gasp!), very slight)... but I thought you should know.

Originally posted to pyrrho on Fri Sep 01, 2006 at 03:22 PM PDT.

Poll

When Hawaii is Republican...

5%4 votes
72%51 votes
21%15 votes

| 70 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  The Best Resort In Hawaii (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kraant

    As far as I know, is Mauna Kea, and it was built by the Rockefellers who are mainly Democrats (again, based on an incomplete picture).

    White coral sand beach.
    Kona coffee milkshake.
    ....Grin.

    9/11 + 4 Years = Katrina... Conservatism Kills.

    by NewDirection on Fri Sep 01, 2006 at 03:17:09 PM PDT

  •  Alaska may pass it in the other direction (6+ / 0-)

    The Alaska Republican leadership has really fucked up the past few years.

    With the primary victory of Sarah Palin, the Alaska Republican party is embroiled in open civil war.

    Either a more honest and ethical party will emerge, or the old boy networks are going to force the reformers/activists into independent or Democratic ranks.

    Keep your eyes on Alaska, strange things are afoot here.

    Look Out! Homosexuals are gonna force your guns to have abortions!

    by Predator Saint on Fri Sep 01, 2006 at 03:20:57 PM PDT

  •  Fun 2004 exit poll claim (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kraant

    for the Inouye race, the exit polling claimed that Inouye won the vote of people who strongly approved of Bush by a 48-47 margin. Granted, Inouye won with like 80% in the actual election.

    Of course Inouye is pretty untouchable, and hopefully Lingle doesn't run for the Senate in 2010. Because I think Inouye may retire by then.

    "Our country right or wrong. When right, to be kept right; when wrong, to be put right" - Carl Schurz

    by RBH on Fri Sep 01, 2006 at 03:21:24 PM PDT

    •  inouye already said he's running again (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kraant

      and he looks healthy so far.

      •  the guest of honor! (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        maryru, kraant

        how'd you like "Kansas with a beach"... rofl, hope you didn't mind me quoting you.

        At the least it proves I listen.

        •  its fine (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          pyrrho, kraant

          but I mainly mean it's a very rural closed society with not much to do.  There are some evangelical churches but this is not hard-shell crazy right wing which is our stereotype of Kansas here.

          I do note Kansas is flushing the ID school board types once again so even they are purple at the edges.  Lawrence is probably to the left of Kauai in my estimation.

          The main problem I have with your vision is when you see Democrat you see probably liberal (Patsy Mink).  I grew up in the deep south.  Dem can just mean "not republican for historical reasons" to me.  If you'd even sat in a council meeting led by Kaipo Asing or Ron Kouchi you'd know what I mean.

  •  State? (5+ / 0-)

    Hawaii Will Be A Republican State in 20 Years

    Will Hawai'i still be a state by then?

    •  lol (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SarahLee, kraant
    •  yes (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kraant

      re-establishing a separate nation is not going to happen.  The activists in the Hawaiian community may want it (and may deserve it based on what happened in 1880-93) but there are way too many white faces and way too many others who realize that the sources of the economy are American tourists, American taxpayers and American retirees relocating.  Two of those three are toast if Hawaii goes independant.  And the third, tourism, is toast if the struggle moves beyond words.

      •  We fought a war over this, no? A state can't (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kraant

        leave the union once it has joined.  

        "How am I not myself?" -- I ♥ Huckabees

        by Joelarama on Fri Sep 01, 2006 at 04:27:58 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  the history of Hawaii's statehood... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          liberal atheist, kraant

          ... is complicated, and the US has even admitted (through congressional act) that it was not done properly.

          Both the admission of it as a US territory, AND the statehood referendum were not done properly.

        •  It didn't join... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          liberal atheist, kraant

          ...Hawai`i was overthrown...

          "Our sweat and our blood have fallen on this land to make other men rich." Cesar Estrada Chavez

          by bic momma on Fri Sep 01, 2006 at 04:45:31 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Hawai`i was a sovereign nation (0+ / 0-)

            ...with a monarchy and a ruling Queen...Queen Lili`uokalani...an illegal coup d`tat was conducted by the second generation of the first missionaries who were originally welcomed and nurtured by the Hawaiian ali`i (royalty) in the early 1800's. These Hawai`i born Anglo businessmen were aided in their treasonous quest to take charge by the US military. A Presidental commission and 2 US Presidents have acknowledged that conspiracy.

            Queen Lili`uokalani was imprisoned and charged with treason.

            "Our sweat and our blood have fallen on this land to make other men rich." Cesar Estrada Chavez

            by bic momma on Fri Sep 01, 2006 at 06:30:40 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  One day (0+ / 0-)

        I have a feeling the Hawaiians will move it beyond words.  You can only oppress people for so long before they start pushing back. . .violently.

        I also have complete faith that when they start pushing, they will win.  

    •  Yes (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kraant

      Yes, Hawai'i will be a state in 20 years.  The "can states leave the union?" question was answered definitively in 1865, and the answer was "no".

      •  she's still waiting for it to be righted. (0+ / 0-)

        On Jan. 17, 1893, at dusk, Queen Lili`uokalani yielded her throne under protest, with these words:

           "I, Lili`uokalani, by the grace of God and under the constitution of the Hawaiian Kingdom, Queen, do hereby solemnly protest against any and all acts done against myself and the constitutional government of the Hawaiian Kingdom by certain persons claiming to have established a Provisional Government of and for this Kingdom.

           "That I yield to the superior force of the United States of America, whose Minister Plenipotentiary, His Excellency John L. Stevens, has caused United States troops to be landed at Honolulu and declared that he would support the said Provisional Government.

           "Now, to avoid any collision of armed forces and perhaps loss of life, I do, under this protest, and impelled by said forces, yield my authority until such time as the Government of the United States shall, upon the facts being presented to it, undo the action of its representative and reinstate me in the authority which I claim as the constitutional sovereign of the Hawaiian Islands."

        •  Please correct me if I am wrong, but (0+ / 0-)

          I believe the continued occupation of Hawaii is being contested in the world court in an effort to reestablish autonomy.

        •  So? (0+ / 0-)

          We stole every square inch of the U.S. mainland, too.  Then we stole Hawaii.

          Do you think the United States is going to give the Dakotas back to the Sioux?  Give Georgia back to the Cherokee?  

          I know history too, and I know what happened in Hawaii in the 1890s.  It was the same thing that happened in Dakota Territory in the 1870s, and everywhere else that's now part of the U.S.A.  We came, we saw, and we conquered.  And we kept.

          •  might makes right (0+ / 0-)

            that goes both ways.

            your version of history is not over, by its reason, you advocate the Hawaiians have every right to see if they are strong enough to revolt.

            I don't find HI soveriegnty very workable in this world, but your description of history is anything but final and merely looks forward to the day when the next conquerors do their thing.

  •  It's like a little microcosm (4+ / 0-)

    of what's happening nationally. Single party domination can lead to disaster.

    Thanks for the great run-down of what's going on in Hawaii. I'll kick a few bucks Gary's way. How's the race looking for him? Any polls? How many in the primary?

    "I have a philosophy about elections. I believe issues divide and values unite."--Gov. Brian Schweitzer

    by Joan McCarter on Fri Sep 01, 2006 at 03:25:58 PM PDT

    •  I don't know of any polls (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SarahLee

      It's so hard to guess anecdotally when you have so many candidates.

      Gary is definately in it though.

      •  10! (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Nightprowlkitty, kraant

        Ten Ds in the primary! Good God.

        Just did some quick Googling. He's getting great press.

        "I have a philosophy about elections. I believe issues divide and values unite."--Gov. Brian Schweitzer

        by Joan McCarter on Fri Sep 01, 2006 at 03:33:43 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  it's a crime (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          pyrrho, SarahLee, kraant

          we need a run off system.  We could elect our next rep with <20% of the vote.  And that in a low turn out primary.</p>

          •  It's absolutely ridiculous (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            kraant

            Open primary, right? Changing races, what chance do you think there is of significant cross-over vote for Case? And did you watch the debate last night? The reports I read were pretty lackluster.

            "I have a philosophy about elections. I believe issues divide and values unite."--Gov. Brian Schweitzer

            by Joan McCarter on Fri Sep 01, 2006 at 03:42:51 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  if they are smart they will (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              kraant

              I hope their current dogma of the Republican Party "all Dems are evil" would stop them from considering it.

              Or their low numbers will.

              But there are lot of the purple democrats that HiD mentions that are clearly supporting case, it's palpable.

            •  I watched the debate (0+ / 0-)

              or mostly listened.  I voted for Akaka days ago.  His performance was horrible.
              I dislike Case for being a closet Republican and he didn't change my mind at all.  But he can string 3-5 cogent sentences together to make a point (even if he is prevaricating/spinning.  Looked wooden at first.  My first impression was if you painted him silver and put a funnel on his head he'd be the Tin woodsman.

              Akaka looked what Case is calling him, past his sell by.  I hope no one else watched.

            •  cross over -- very little (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              kraant

              Hard core R's are not organizing to back Case (unlike Lieberman).  They will vote for Lingle, vote in the HI-02 race between Hogue and Kawananakoa or in other down ballot races.

              Akaka's problem is deep and wide.  The one local I trust on this stuff tells me she hear many many people saying he's just too old.  And this is the old school, conservative Japanese community.  They are hard core Dems but not liberals beyond the issues of the man holding them down.

              The moderates here vote in the Dem primary.  They may break for Case, but his war position is unpopular.  I'm looking forward to working the polls to see just what the buzz tells me.  

    •  thanks on Gary's behalf by the way (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mcjoan, Nightprowlkitty

      :)

  •  Am I wrong to assume that rich retirees, (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    liberal atheist, kraant

    predominantly Republican, continue to pour into the state in droves?  And at some point possibly already passed would completely outnumber folks who are from there?  

    The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function -- Edward Teller.

    by lgmcp on Fri Sep 01, 2006 at 03:26:24 PM PDT

    •  yes (5+ / 0-)

      and a lot of mainlanders turning outrageous realestate on the mainland into retirement on the islands.

      Even middle class mainland immigration is hard because people are not building affordable housing.  Why would they? They can build a million dollar home and the WHOLE world knows about Hawaii... there will be a housing crisis of tent-city proportion coming.

      •  So yes they pour in, and will outnumber (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SarahLee, kraant

        (not yes I'm wrong to assume). And that will help change the political complexion of Hawaii to a nasty sunburned color.  

        If a true majority truly voted their pocketbook ...   we'd have real wages, real healthcare, and we'd tax the rich.  But at present it mostly seems that the rich vote their pocketbook, and too many of the rest of us vote however the rich tell us to.

        The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function -- Edward Teller.

        by lgmcp on Fri Sep 01, 2006 at 03:39:56 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  National and Philosophical Point/Strategy (3+ / 0-)

    One important thing, and why I quote HiD (besides respecting him though we disagree about this primary a bit), is that this is not about appealing to voters.

    NOPE.

    This is about progress.

    People need to learn the elements of progress... people are seeking ways to grow, they need to grow more progressive, they need to learn liberalism, understand why it's life giving and promotes social health.  We are not asking, "do you want freedom?" to America... a "no" answer is NOT acceptable.

    We have democratic means to help convince them "no" is not acceptable as an answer to "freedom?", and they are the rights to free speech, by which we need to make philosophical arguments, psychological arguments.

    TWO: I also want to point out how the Hawaii bloggers on dkos have been very respectful to each other. Even Case is not SO BAD... he just ought to be in a more conservative state or running as a light republican... but as for the primary candidates in HI-02... it's a wealth of riches.

    Gary is most progressive, so I support him, he understand the outer islands, so I support him, and he's farthest from the Honolulu patriarchy so I support him... however, Mazie is a good person, I get allong with dkos user raatz who strongly supports her. When people ask for information in our diaries, we give it, someone supporting and owrking for Gary posted a reply with links to all the MANY candidates web sites when someone asked "who else is running".

    Elections should be run that way.  The Hawaii Democratic party does not have to fade away, it's full of GOOD committed, loving, compasionate people that want good things for Hawaii.

    But I fea it IS going to fade away based on the current trend.

    •  bah (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kraant

      Dem party will do fine once the old boys are flushed out.  There are as many far left types floating around out here as rich republican retirees.  And many of those build multi million dollar estates as well.  And many of those white retirees like their Medicare and govt health care systems.  They are persuadable moderates.

      The real crisis here is education and opportunity.  without and educated populace no company is going to set up a high tech business here.  Ag/tourism just don't pay.  I don't think I've ever seen a resort destination that didn't have a ghetto of sheet/burger flippers nearby.  Think of Aspen or the Caribs.

      •  well (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kraant

        the real crisis is neither party has a plan for those real problems.

        where we disagree is not really where we are politically... it's this "flushed out" dynamic.  I find that is very very difficult... if we do it for the party the hard way... it involves taking them ALL OUT OF POWER for a generation or two so they can't pass on the inside track.

        Very painful.

        •  yep (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kraant

          but the idea that no one cares is wrong headed.  

          The problem is the core of the Democratic party is old school Japanese.  Culturally they will not cut their elders off.  Others will have to wrest power away which may well spin off the culturally conservative to the R's.

          It is what it is.

          •  well (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            kraant

            I care, you do.

            mcjoan does (she see the Case dynamic as contrast to Lieberman)... but that's how it is with statistics, if 90% of people don't care and know HI to be "solid blue", "no one cares" is not misleading...  

            The real question is, do enough people care, and there, I still think, "no".

            Look at the kos quote I'm referring too, you defended kos in that diary and I'm fine with him having his own opinion, in that sense, but look, how does it not add up to, "just let it play itself out, you can't blame the Hawaiian residents for voting for Republicans"...?

            Even that is right, I won't "blame them", but I would like to prevent it.

            •  not care is the wrong phrase (0+ / 0-)

              I think many just don't agree with your politics.  I fear pushing people who are too far left in their thinking will accelerate the rise of R's as an acceptable alternative.

              I defended Kos only because I had the same reaction to GH's diary.  Late comer demanding attention right at the last minute didn't go down too well.  Bit of a cheap stunt.

  •  you left off a choice (4+ / 0-)
    1.  I'm wrong in my conclusion.

    Hawaii will be (is?) purple like virtually every state.  Smart honest moderate Republicans will defeat incompetent machine Dems.  Smart honest Dems will defeat wingnut R's.  Is Connecticut lost to the dark side?  It is considered a liberal state even with more R's in the House and an R governor.  And Joementum in the Senate for 18 years.

    Fringe left is not going to have a free ride simply by winning the Dem primary.   And may well not win in a Dem primary.  

    Point 5 is just wrong.  Plenty of people care.  But breaking the "old boy's network" is a long slow process.  Much of it just relies on time and those clogging up progress dying.  Our local Dem party chair is no longer a 75 year old Japanese fixer for Inouye, but rather an activist gay haole man (guessing 60ish) who ran against and defeated the "old boy".

    Demographics are also changing.  The oppressed plantation labor population is dying off.  Their kids and the newcomers are not lockstep Dems and have different concerns than the prior generation. Schools, development, affordable housing, jobs are the key issues now and those in power have not solved them or even shown an ability to make improvements.  The Peter Principle is strong in our elected officialdom.

    I think you find lack of interest in Gary Hooser to mean lack of interest overall.  Hardly the same thing.  

    Re Lingle.  She's not a wingnut.  And within the little bit of power she has with a veto proof Dem state house, she at least looks effective.  Esp. compared to the dithering legislature.  She's not far from the center of political gravity here.  You may not like that but it's a fact.  This is not Berkeley.  The Kansas type Republicans here are not showing any ability to get elected.

    •  some hypebole (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SarahLee, kraant

      well, some people "care", of course... and all states are purple, true, etc etc.

      But HiD, I'm reacting to a mind set, a real mind set, and I'm also doing it here in this national setting, not just the Hawaiian perspective.

      There really is a wide idea that HI is "deep blue"... I take that as a frame of reference even while obviously acknowledging your point that HI isn't really that at all.

      I also acknowledge that it's ME that wants a liberal influence on the national level.  Our Representatives are HIs contribution to national politics, how liberal they should be depends on what direction Hawaii wants, not just for Hawaii, but for the Nation.  The nation right now it far to the right of Hawaii... having some more conservative mayors or governors might be a different debate.  Where is Harry Kim, by the way, I see some conservative in him, but he's a real populist and he cares about the people of his island (and all Hawaiians), believe me that's good enough for me.

      I myself am pretty moderate, a centrist, if that word still can have the meaning people assign it... BUT, the country needs liberalism.

      If you are driving a car and you recognize it MUST TURN LEFT right now... that doesn't mean you are a leftist, that you say the car should only and always turn left.

      I think that's where we are.  Hawaii should help the nation turn left, and Democrats should think twice about letting their party fall under Republican dominance. In many ways you know more about HI than I, however... Lingle's popularity is a big glaring fact.  Numbers like that have broad meanings, it means that if someone is "like Lingle", they are viable.

      I don't fear the mixed party state, I think single party systems grow corrupt... but the Democratic party has to get off it's ass if it even intends to share leadership in Hawaii, I think it's quite possible for Hawaii to simply invert and become a Republican state for some period of time, as I argue here.

      PS: I don't find a lack of interest in Hooser... my support of Hooser is borne of this other analysis, and specifically arguments with Armando in which I pointed out that capitualation on the SCOTUS was too much, it condemned Democrats to a degree. He convinced me the primaries are where you fight for the philosophy of the party.

      And I know Lingle is not a wingnut, but she's a wingnut facilitator, a wingnut enabler.  She RAVES about Bush, all the time.  She's no Chafee. There will be a tipping point for Republicans... Lingle is that tipping point, and if Lingles start getting elected statewide... more a few Kansas-Hawaiians might well slip into the mix.

      •  can't agree (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Newsie8200, Skaje, kraant

        Lingle is that tipping point, and if Lingles start getting elected statewide... more a few Kansas-Hawaiians might well slip into the mix.

        they lost 5 seats with her out working her ass off in state house races.  Hell, 10% of the caucus was convicted of sex crimes....

        I think your vision is too binary.

        •  good point (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kraant

          I'll admit I'm seeing part of a trend that has not borne fruit yet.

          But then, you have told me there are not Lingle Republicans (except Lingle) really running, she's doing this with the traditional impractical Hawaii Republicans.

          She's about to get another term... I just don't see why she can't have a bunch of Case types running as Republicans and then, however liberal as individuals, enabling the Republican agenda.

        •  btw (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kraant

          I see why you say that about binary and it's fair, to a degree.

          I do not see things as so starkly binary, I am increasing the contrast in this landscape so it doesn't just look like a blur.

          I'm trying to show the patterns of what is going on here, they involve Lingle, they involve a conventional wisdom about Hawaii's "blueness" upon which we agree, and also my own belief that states like Hawaii do have enough genuine compassion for people that we ought to export more than a little of that to DC, as we have in the past, before.

        •  Pretty much everyone (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kraant

          was predicting in 2004 that legislature Republicans would get enough seats to prevent any more overrides of Lingle's vetoes.  Instead they lost a third of their House caucus.  How did that happen?  I think Hawaii Democrats still have some life left in them.

          •  me too, me too (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            kraant

            I'm not saying it's really too late.

            But I don't see us doing what it will take, it's as if we are waiting around while the Lingles and the Cases build up on us.

            E.g. I fully expect to like the HI-02 representative, whichever one of them wins (I just hope it's Hooser)

            •  I'd probably vote for Hirono (0+ / 0-)

              if I wasn't in Abercrombie's district, but Hooser would also make a great Representative.  So would Brian Schatz (plus he's only 33, and would probably be a Senator some day if he wins).  Most of the others running also seem to be good Democrats, but I haven't read enough that shows they would be great Democrats.  None of them are even remotely as DINOish as Case.

  •  Unfortunately... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    pyrrho, SarahLee, wezelboy, kraant

    I have to agree! The state is trending red and when you have someone like Ed Case, that has the nerve to call himself a democrat, it's already too red here. If you watched the debate between Akaka and Case last night, and I'm sure I'm biased, but all I heard from Case was republican talking points. He is worse than Lieberman. If Lieberman and Case showed up here on the DailyKos we would call them what they are...Trolls!! If Ed Case manages to beat Akaka, and I see that as a real possibility, it wouldn't surprise me to see him switch parties once in office. He has obtained the support of organizations that have traditionally supported the republicans. In his TV ads, he is almost begging the republicans to come out and vote for him. We have an "open" primary here so republicans can cast their vote for the democratic candidate of their choice. We really need to get the trolls out of the Democratic party!!

    Just when you thought it couldn't possibly get any worse...

    by reflectionsv37 on Fri Sep 01, 2006 at 03:41:28 PM PDT

    •  Very scary (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kraant
      If Hawaii goes red, I expect this gem of a state (which shouldn't even belong to the U.S.) to be nothing but cheesey high rise condos, casinos and resorts, with its environment obliterated.  Maui is already trending that way...the entire western/southern part of the island.  

      This is because only rich white folks can even afford to visit these islands.  Then they stay and build, build, build.   Oprah just built a vacation house in Maui.

      I have to have faith that the true blue locals (native Hawaiians, pacific/asian immigrants, hippies) will eventually prevail.  

      •  nope (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kraant

        we can stop the high rises but resorts and development is what is feeding the natives.

        Agriculture for export is dead.  There is nothing we can grow that can't be grown cheaper in South America somewhere.  

        Military bases bring their own development/environmental issues.

        Other than offering those beaches to rich (and not so rich) tourists, what does Hawaii have to offer the rest of the world in order to pay for modern goods?  The locals don't want to go back to the stone age from what I see.  

        The problem isn't politics.  The Dems have not been anti development.

        •  science (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          dufffbeer, kraant

          this place could be great for renewable energy research.

          Tt's a great place for oceanic, astronomic, and vulcanological research. Not just "doable" but really great.

          Also, Hawaii should have a strong software/internet business... we're more than wired enough, it's cheap compared to a lot of places, and technology is a Pacific business, everyone involved likes coming to Hawaii (that is, Californians and the Japanese, et al).

          though done right I think tourism is great.

          SOMEONE needs to start building affordable housing, however, and I can't see "letting" the market do it itself when you can sell million dollar homes to a world market with unlimited wealthy people that know and like Hawaii's natural gifts.

          The government needs to do that, and this is one reason I have little hope that even liberal Republicans will be sufficient, that's just not in their arsenal of ideas.

      •  funny (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        pyrrho, kraant

        that you mention "rich white folks" and then Oprah.

        The Four Horsemen of Bushism: War, Corruption, Hypocrisy and Greed

        by esquimaux on Fri Sep 01, 2006 at 04:39:51 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  State Rep. Cynthia Thielen? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kraant

    "One: anyone conservative, even a little, that is also practical, even a little, with the exception of Lingle, has become a Democrat,"

    I've only met Rep. Thielen once, in context of her advocacy of agricultural hemp, and we didn't get into any other issues. Got a good gut-level feeling from her. Does she have a wingnut side I didn't see?

    $1 donations only.
    Masel 4 Senate
    1214 E. Mifflin
    Madison, WI 53703
    http://www.myspace.com/ben_masel

    by ben masel on Fri Sep 01, 2006 at 04:33:33 PM PDT

    •  I don't know (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kraant

      so I'll take that as a counter example.

      I'm turning up the contrast on this, but I have not distorted the picture.  Consider, though, my underlying point is that this will not remain the case, as Lingle and other more moderate Republicans take the stage, suddenly there can be real competitive races in places that have otherwise become considered solidly and irrevocably blue.

    •  speaking as her son (0+ / 0-)

      Cynthia is the poster child for the moderate sensible part of the republican party. And I think this is the future for the republican party in Hawaii.

      Yes there will be some wingnuts elected too just as the democrats elected Cynthia McKinney. But most of the republicans that will get elected in Hawaii as the republicans gain control will be the sensible moderates like my mom.

      Keep in mind it's not the democratic policies that will lead to a republican takeover, it's the corruption. So the republicans will win on a platform of being a bit to the right, and no corruption.

      • David Thielen (registered Democrat)
  •  your other points (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kraant
    1.  All are Dems ex Lingle.

    Harry Kim, head of govt on BI is a Republican at the moment

    Bryan Baptiste, the head on Kauai is a Republican.  His predecessor for 8 years was a Republican.

    The locals are conservative on social issues.  Gay marriage was overturned rapidly.  People picketed the showing of Dogma.  

    1. already discussed
    1.  Your analysis of the lingle/Hirono race is way too simplistic.  That race had a number of twists and turns and still Lingle just squeaked in.  Hirono was not the Heir apparent.  That was Jeremy Harris who imploded in corruption scandals fairly late in the race.  He was a haole outsider not a home grown "old boy".  But gave in to the old system.  

    Hirono still almost pulled the chestnuts from the fire.

    •  Regarding Harry Kim (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kraant

      He left the GOP and is officially an independant.  When he considered running for governor this year, he was very clear it would be only as a Democrat.

      And about the 2002 governor election, it was much closer than polls were predicting.  Hirono was losing by double digits for most of the campaign.  Plus the fact that she had to ditch her mayoral campaign and take over when Harris folded, and fend off a significant primary challenge from Case, who just fed the meme that she was "Old Boy", i.e., corrupt, when Hirono was anything but.

    •  Kim (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kraant

      I didn't know that! I have looked into his party affiliation before and didn't find it... none of that helps your argument though HiD, you were the one that assured me the lock was solid because there was no stable of not-totally-insane Republicans!

      I have not really simplified the picture so much as done it in brief and lined up many of the facts so the contrast between our expectations (nationally) for Hawaii as a Democratic State, and the reality.

      I mean, remember, my argument is primarilly geared toward a mindset that doesn't realize ANY of those points you are making... that thinks Hawaii is solid blue.

      You see people come in to the HI diaries saying Case is totally liberal and we're making it up that he's more like a Republican in spirit.

      many of the details you bring up are valid, but are finer details than this essay could possibly convey. It's already longer than I'd prefer for what is meant to be a few direct points.

      Note: it's not like you are really arguing with the title sentiment... THIS is not a secure blue state. AND it's less liberal than it has been in terms of who it sends to Washington.

      btw, do you have a link I could read about Kim's affiliations, I know I should have been able to find that... perhaps I had google impairment at the time.

      •  I don't see people calling Case liberal (0+ / 0-)

        they call him a Democrat.  He is solid on environmental issues so far.  And by all reports good on social issues.

        He just looses me on Iraq and economic issues.

        •  no, in a couple of these diaries (0+ / 0-)

          people have gone to web sites on Case and said he was just as liberal as Akaka... one even said a claim to the contrary was just single issue anti-war politics...

          •  that's probaly MelUH (0+ / 0-)

            he's off his rocker when it comes to Case.  Despises Akaka over gay rights issues and the Bishop estate corruption.  Well founded points, but not important at the moment.

            You can't go on a couple of outliers (or are those out-liars)

    •  Harris got set up (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kraant

      by the Democratric establishment.  He wasn't anymore corrupt than the lot of them that actually taught him how to do it.  He just was too independent for them and they were worried if he got in they could not control.

  •  Hawaii resident here (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kraant

    I think you're severely overestimating Republican chances.

    A recap of Hawaii politics:

    After annexation, and for the first half of the 20th century, Republicans become dominant in Hawaii as the party of Big Business.  Even during the 1930s, when FDR ushered in a massive Democratic wave across the country, Hawaii Republicans still held on to power.  Labor unions had difficulty organizing the racially separated plantation workers.  It wasn't until after WWII that labor unions took hold, and in the early 1950s Democrats finally took over, with Japanese WWII veterans (such as now-Senator Daniel Inouye) being a large part of it.  Moderate (even liberal) Republicans were still popular, such as Sen. Hiram Fong and Gov. William Quinn, but the former was replaced by a Democrat upon retirement, and the latter was defeated in 1962, leading to a 40-year run of Democratic governors (1962-2002) and massive majorities in the state legislature (from 1954 to today).

    It wasn't until the 80s, during the Reagan years, that Republicans even became somewhat competitive again in Hawaii.  Pat Saiki took the open Honolulu based 1st Congressional district.  Frank Fasi (who had been the Democratic mayor of Honolulu from 1968-1980) joined the Republican party and retook the mayorship in 1984.  Several Democratic councilmen and women also switched parties, giving the Republicans a majority on the Honolulu City Council.  Republicans made a serious try at the open governorship in 1986.

    And then, the political winds shifted back in the early 90s.  The turncoat Democrats were defeated, Democrats regained the entire Congressional delegation, and several Republican state legislators even joined the Democratic party when right-wing fundies took over their party.  In 1994, as Republicans took pretty much every open seat nationwide, the Republican candidate for governor (Pat Saiki again) came in third place.  This is when Lingle came on the scene, as Maui mayor she challenged and almost knocked off Cayetano in 1998, and Republicans gained enough seats in the state legislature that the Dems were no longer had a super-majority.  Hawaii was undergoing a severe recession at the time, at Cayetano's problems with the legislature Dems just compounded the party's troubles.  In 2002, Lingle became governor, and in 2004, Bush did much better than in 2000.

    Yet Republicans lost a bunch of their state legislators.  This year, Lingle is expected to win big, but no one is predicting serious Republican gains in the legislature.

    Is Hawaii a Democratic state?  For the forseeable future, I believe so.  They have no bench outside of Lingle.  Is Hawaii a liberal state?  I think it is.  Maybe not as liberal as Massachusetts, but far more so than other states where Democrats cling to power (West Virginia, Arkansas, etc.)

    •  the bench (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kraant

      I cannot imagine a bench is not being built on the model of success that Lingle has demonstrated.

      I said in 20 years because that takes into account the political cycle and how this stuff works.  But Lingle is going to get another few years, she may move on to Senate or God Knows What.

      I believe liberal and conservative, left and right, are not actually apt descriptions of philosophy, but in the core ideas of compassion, caring for the land, a certain amount of responsibility for how we take care of things, Hawaii is liberal, it's not into raping in the name of greed, and that's the part of being liberal most important to me.

      But strategically, there is a scary opportunity... and the nature of the Honolulu patriarchal Democratic Party (sorry, don't know a better way to put it) is the extra element that makes that plan possible.  Rather than being proactive, this party will just hold on until the pressure builds and it's a sweep.

      HiD thinks, evidently, it'll just morph into a two party state which you could argue it already is if you look closely... that would be better than the scenario I've argued for, and no one can really tell the future, so I offer mine as my guess for the time being.

      •  That's the thing (0+ / 0-)

        Lingle's ascension has not built up the bench.  They're worse off in the legislature than the late 90s.  None of their state Senators is viable statewide.  Lt. Gov. Aiona is significantly more conservative than Lingle, and is not elected in his own right (as is the case with Lt. Governors in other states).  Their Attorney General is appointed.  They have no other statewide officeholders.

        Maybe that will all change this year, or in 2008.  But I doubt it.

        •  no, I said in 20 (0+ / 0-)

          becuase I think it will take some time.

          Also, if Lingle stays in politics, the idea of a popular Republican will slowly convey the idea that Republicans can be popular, and you will get these types stepping forward.

          •  she's out in 4 years (0+ / 0-)

            hard to have coattails once you are gone.  Will she defeat Case/Akaka for Senate in 2012?  maybe.  Will that build a wave for moderate R's?  Doubt it.  

            •  you've already predicted (0+ / 0-)

              a two party state where a tide of moderate repubs rises somewhat, havn't you?

              •  bit like boxing fog (0+ / 0-)
                1. we already have plenty of conservatives and moderates.  All we will see is some re-branding.  Not some earthshaking slide into conservative hell.
                1. Lingle has not proven able to drag Republicans into office.  Especially strident ones to her right.
                1.  Her power is not all that great as she has a veto proof legislature against her.

                where we disagree is you see Lingle as some measure of a sea change and go all meta over it.  What I see is a continuation of history.  R's have been elected before if they are moderate and the competition is a crook/no hoper.  As I pointed out.  We have R's in charge of Kauai (last 12), BI (Kim has been all over the map) and even Maui when LL was mayor.   There is no invincible liberal monolith here and there never was.  Your basic premise is flawed at its core.

                •  my premise (0+ / 0-)

                  where you err is calling that my premise.  My writing on this has been very simple, I didn't claim it was deep, and it's been an argument that Hawaii is not deep blue.

                  My assumption is that "conventional wisdom" says Hawaii is Deep Blue, and by that people meant our state and federal officials, not each and every council member, nore each state congressperson, but overall.

                  The fact is, and you have more than agreed, that conventional wisdom is false.

                  My premise has been to call that assumption to scrutiny and doubt... the simplifications, really increased contrast, has been to break through the conventional wisdom on this.  I am not imagining that as I have specifically read that many times.  I'm correcting that impression.

                  Two, I also use us as a state of why not all Democrats are the same, especially in a state with a long dominant party. And regardless of examples of Republicans in the state, Hawaii still has had that long dominance, and so esepecially has a diversity born from the fact that only Democrats have been taking certain seats for quite some time.

                  Case is not the same as Hirono or Hooser or Schatz or Hanabusa.  That the only meta I know of, people do NOT GET that if you want to affect the party philosophy you have to care about primaries.

                  People do not care about primaries, and end up with representatives more conservative than their district. HOWEVER, on the conservative side, you rarely see that.  You rarely see some progressive representing a conservative state or district, and I think there are reasons for that, reasons that have to do with some problems about how Democrats view politics.

                  •  the title of this diary is (0+ / 0-)

                    Hawaii will be a Republican state in 20 years.  eye catching advertising perhaps but not correct.

                    By Republican state, I think most people think Utah or Kansas or Texas.  You are wildly overreacting.  Hawaii has never been that liberal, but with 60%+ non caucasians, you will never end up with the current Republican party holding thrall.  Bigots and brown people don't mix that well despite what michelle malkin might think.

                    again, you assume that the Dems in Hawaii regularly elect D's to the right of them.  Case is the only one I can point to and we'll see if he's to the right of the Dem voter pool in this hard fought primary.  And like it or not, unless you want to make the Dem primary a closed vote of a little club (and watch Case go on the Independant line), the voters coming to the poll are the "democrats" here.  There will not be a huge crossover vote in my opinion.

                    You seem to be approaching this as a board game.  Since D's can perhaps jam a person who is to the left of the district through, that we what we should do to balance out R's doing that in their districts.  Maybe we're smarter.  I personally think that pushing through someone who is more than a little off the midpoint of the district accelerates voting shifts to the minority party.  The primary voter here does get your point, they just don't agree with your political viewpoints.

                    Maybe I just don't understand your writing or your point.  I see a lot of handwringing over something that is being "lost" and the rise of Lingle Republicans.  I simply do not see any evidence of the arguments you are making or for the hyperbolic concern you have that Hawaii is being lost.  

      •  All it needs are the candidates (0+ / 0-)

        I've seen my mom Cynthia Thielen (Republican - state house) campaign and it is amazing. She is in a Democratic district and she gets 70% or more of the vote - when the Democrats even bother to put up a sacrificial lamb against her.

        If she can pull 70% in a contested race, virtually any seat can go 51% republican. All it takes are quality candidates on the republican side. And all that takes is for a lot of politicians to get tired of waiting their turn on the democratic side and switching.

        When that tipping point hits, there will be a lot of cross-over.

  •  Forecasted Hawaii as GOP state by 2016 (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    pyrrho, kraant

    as part of my post-2004 statistical roundup and comments. :)

    What the Pubs did right [in 2004]

    A radical improvement in their voter turnout from 2000.

    Strong improvement among Asians, and all persons of partly Asian ancestry.

    Improvement among both Hispanic Whites, and white persons of mixed Hispanic and non-Hispanic background.

    The Pubs overachieved in the states including California, Hawaii, and Virginia.

    Despite what can only be described as a cross-grained approach to the dominant secular culture of the United States, the GOP won despite increasing resistance to their platform -- resistance now emerging from unlikely corners.

    What the Pubs lost

    New England; the Pubs egregiously underperformed their demographic in this region of the country.

    Ditto for the Pacific Northwest.

    And likewise for the MN-IA-WS triad.

    Republicans were compelled to exert themselves to retain a number of putatively safe states including Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Missouri, Nevada, and Ohio.

    Republicans, despite outreach efforts, lost ground with Native Americans.

    They lost with Hispanics of African or partly-African ancestry

    They lost with persons declaring mixed white and African-American heritage.

    They lost further with African-Americans.

    They lost ground with non-Hispanic whites.

    Yes, that's right. With non-Hispanic whites.

    On balance

    The Republicans will eventually gain ground with Asians and Hispanics and newer generations of non-Hispanic whites, neither desirous of nor impressed by codeword race-baiting, will gradually drift away from the current-edition GOP, and this process is starting right now.

    The Republicans will eventually leave their Jim Crow Refugee days behind, but that departure will be as slow as the passing of the Boomer generation, which has as many bigots as it has activists, something none of that generation need be told.

    Forecast for the future

    So long as RedBlueThink prevails, there will be not only a continuation but an expansion of battleground states, and an increase in the native volatility of electoral forecasting.

    This condition will greatly favor wedge-issue politics and negative campaigning, as well as drive up the cost of running a successful campaign. A few billion dollars? Try a few dozen billion next time, and a few hundred billion not beyond the realm of possibility. This is, after all, warfare by other means, for the greatest prize of all.

    As of 200[4], there were 12 states where the outcome was decided by approximately 5% or less.

    By 2020, there could be as many as 20 states in that condition (I would guess 17).

    It might seem that the battleground is moving into the redder regions of the country.

    However, that motion could just as easily reverse itself, throwing Washington and and Delaware into play just as easily as Arkansas and Virginia.

    In the long run (post-2020), the cards will sort out, and then will begin in earnest the end days of the conservative dominance of the Republican party, and by extension of the form and character of American politics.

    Figure this - the likely battleground states of 2020 are Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin. With some effort, Maine and Michigan can be dragged into the fray, likewise (brace yourself) Mississippi and South Carolina.

    The Republicans lick their chops at the prospect of a radical rightward realignment.

    They might play the division game well, but they will be masters of nothing but a divided kingdom for as long as they choose to spend the spiraling billions to retain it.

    And they will never feel safe in their mastery, and while more battelgrounds may favor the Pubs in presidential elections, it will do wonders for Democratic prospects in Congress.

    And when it comes down to it, the contest for the White House is a straight up-down comparison of the merits of individuals.

    I suspect we will eventually find the recruits we need to field a superior top ticket to that provided by the GOP.

    Perhaps we already have, and must do no more than dust ourselves off, regroup, and challenge anew.

    It's going to be okay.

    Very long run

    As Republicans release their codeword mantra of race-based politics, their grasp on the votes of many non-Hispanic whites will relax, as well. Freed of that complex by reduced propaganda and younger, fresher, minds, the nation in all its diversity, white as well as nonwhite, will vote on issues other than continent of origin. This will be better for the Democrats than for the Republicans electorally, since the right has had more of a need for the crutch of race than the left ever did. However, it will be good for the GOP, as well, to set the Jim Crow refugees adrift and outside of American politics for keeps.

    And that will be good for us all.

    I suspect the GOP will have what it imagines to be a good run of it for the next couple of decades; they've been working for this moment for quite some time.

    But if they think we are going to roll for them, they've got another thing coming.

    And if they overreach themselves, we'll make it hell for them for sure, and make our return all the sooner.

    As for tactics, I think the Democrats have good game, and proved it. The Republicans never expected such a tough contest, never would have imagined to be found vulnerable in so many areas.

    Regardless, they took the trophy.

    But if they plan on having any more of them, they'd better bring their "A" game next time, all the time.

    Because we are, indeed, motivated

    -----

    Seems to me this might well be one of my best diaries.

    All 4 comments' worth of it. :)

    Lets All Bow Our Heads In A Moment of BOO-YAH!!!!

    by cskendrick on Fri Sep 01, 2006 at 04:58:33 PM PDT

  •  Is Hawaii really necessary? (0+ / 0-)

    I mean, really?

  •  A little late to the party (0+ / 0-)

    but another dynamic that you failed to mention is the shifting demographic of HI voters.  As more and more boomers retire to the islands, we become Florida-esque in our age distribution.  That too is going to trend us Republican.

    War is not the continuation of politics by other means. On the contrary, it represents a catastrophic failure of political skill and imagination. - Kofi Annan

    by Arclite on Mon Sep 04, 2006 at 03:28:06 AM PDT

    •  true (0+ / 0-)

      it's a conservative trend to some degree for various reasons .. and even liberals that come by nature will be more pro-development, for example, just by virtue of shopping for some place to live.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site