As a sometime participant in the Daily Kos primary wars, I can't claim that I haven't contributed to the circular firing squad going on right now. Truth is everyone has valid reasons for supporting their candidate that speaks to their world view and beliefs for what's best for the country. However, this becomes a splitting of hairs when compared to what binds us together.
I, for one, am hoping for a quick primary process with our nominee decided by February. The reason? I am thoroughly excited about our prospects for a landslide in November, and am ready to see the power of a united Netroots taking on a divided, squabbling conservative movement.
Today, I was struck by two articles. The first, in the Chicago Tribune, highlights how the issues being discussed in the Democratic and Republican primaries. Here, the article cites a CNN poll on what party voters care about:
Top issues for Democrats
- Iraq
- Health care
- Economy
Top issues for Republicans
- Economy
- Illegal immigration
- Abortion
Note that Iraq is not even a major concern of the Republicans, and that is the most pressing issue to voters. Also, Republicans are clearly uneasy about the current economy. Yet, their candidates are clueless on the topic, offering standard boilerplate tax cuts for the rich.
From the same article:
Romney audiences, along with the Iowans who turn out to see fellow Republicans Fred Thompson and Mike Huckabee, are more apt to ask about purging "pork" spending and relaxing gun control. The Democrats who come to see Richardson, Hillary Clinton and their party rivals tend to ask more about extending health coverage and limiting greenhouse gases.
Republicans are more concerned with pork spending and easy availability of guns. Democrats are talking about health care and climate change.
Personally, I feel that this article was overly kind to the "issues" the Republicans have been raising in their campaign. Here's Mitt Romney on Foreign Policy:
His platform for cleaning up Bush's foreign policy that 70% of the nation opposes is to "double Guantanamo." Then, you have the Republicans trying to "out Tancredo Tancredo" on immigration, placing their prospective Hispanic vote total down to African-American levels.
The second article I read today was in the Post by John Judis and Ruy Teixeira, authors of the Emerging Democratic Majority. The crux of the article is below:
In 2006, the new Democratic coalition -- women, professionals and minorities, augmented by disillusioned Reagan Democrats -- retook Congress. In 2008, it's poised to do even better. Just look at the map.
The old conservative Republican majority was built on white voters in the Sunbelt and Reagan Democrats in Northern suburbs. By 1992, this coalition had already begun to collapse: The Far West (including California), much of the Midwest and the Middle Atlantic (including Pennsylvania and New Jersey) defected to the Democratic Party in the presidential election.
Since Bill Clinton's triumph, states such as California, Illinois and New Jersey have turned bluer and bluer. Meanwhile, the Democrats have consolidated their hold on the Northeast and have begun to make inroads in the Rocky Mountain states -- and even in some Southern border states. Virginia, once a Republican bastion, has elected two Democratic governors in a row and seems poised to make both of its U.S. senators Democratic. In the Southwest, where Rove dreamed of capturing the Mexican American vote, Democrats have been doing strikingly well, backed by Latinos alienated by Republican anti-immigration tirades, sagebrush libertarians fed up with the religious right and moderate transplants from states such as California. In Barry Goldwater's Arizona, a Democratic governor is in her second term, and Democrats now control half of the state's congressional seats.
Or consider Colorado. In 2000, Bush carried the state by nine percentage points, and in 2002, Republican Sen. Wayne Allard easily won reelection. But in 2004, Bush won the state by just five points, Democrats took control of both chambers of the state legislature, and Democrat Ken Salazar won a marquee Senate race. In 2006, Democrats expanded their control of the state legislature and elected Bill Ritter Jr. governor by a landslide. They have an excellent chance of picking up the other Senate seat next year.
Against this blue tide, only the deep South and some sparsely populated prairie and mountain states remain dependably Republican. But the GOP can't take any state for granted anymore. In Republican Kansas, the governor, lieutenant governor and attorney general are Democrats.
Add this to the lack of substance being displayed by the GOP and you have the recipe for a solid Democratic victory. Throw in the current GOP civil war, as best evidenced by the battle over Mike Huckabee, and you have the makings of a landslide.
I'm under no illusions that the Right will fight hard. A landslide will not be wrapped up under the Christmas tree. However, the time is ripe, and the energy is with the progressives. When I talk to conservatives, they grouse about how terrible their candidates are. One look at the recommended diaries here shows how enthusiastic the Democratic base is about one or more of its candidates. I have no doubt we will get behind whoever wins the nomination. The same can't be said on the other side. The war about Huckabee is over the soul of the Republican Party. By contrast, the Democratic Primary Wars are over who is the best agent to implement agreed upon progressive policies. This is the same enthusiasm gap that was present in 2006.
I'm hoping for the nomination to be settled as quickly as possible, so the real fight can begin. I've seen Kos licking his chops as well. The netroots has grown substantially since 2004. I'm ready to see it in action.