Okay, don't get too excited. I'm not advocating or predicting. Just wondering, if things go as bad as many of us fear in Afghanistan (and we are still in Iraq), who might run as an antiwar Democrat against Obama? Or will anyone?
Actually, each of those (bad) war eventualities seem probable.
Again, I'm not saying that even in that case that anyone should necessarily support an insurgent.
But, as someone who lived through 1968, and ran my campus chapter of the Eugene McCarthy brigade, I know how this can develop.
Remember that LBJ, who I am not likening to Obama, won a great landslide in 1964 and drew much admiration from liberals, the young and blacks for his stands on civil rights and voting rights. But the war did him in.
Here is a Spencer Ackerman report on a new poll showing Afghans turning against U.S. -- especially in area where we have done airstrikes. And Obama not only hopes but plans to send 30,000 more U.S. troops there.
Already we see that liberals are not against sharply criticizing the new president on such issues as the stimulus bill, rendition and torture, and so on. Expect criticism of his war policies once the economy gets more settled. We will never be lockstep like the Republicans.
So, for the final time, I am not advocating. just wondering, in the arm chair, who you guys think might emerge as the almost inevitable "antiwar" Democratic (or even Independent) candidate in 2012? Or just talk about the possibility of anyone doing it.
Greg Mitchell's new book is "Why Obama Won." He is editor of Editor & Publisher.