Day Trading & Election 2008 I opened up an Ameritrade account today with $2,500. The general manager at the club here is a genius with money and the stock market (he's 37 and retiring next year for you doubters) so I'm just going to tag along and see if I can make some money before the tuition check comes due and I lose it anyway.
Now my question regarding the presidential election in 2008. For the last five years (and most likely for the next three) the Democratic platform has consisted of one issue- Bush hating (Incidentally, this issue also comes up while watching seventies porn, and no- I didn't write this just so I could use that joke). With Bush's approval numbers dropping below forty or so percent, many on the left have taken this as some kind of victory. However, I'm not sure if this strategy has any long term benefits for the Democrats. Bush is gone in 2008 regardless, Cheney isn't going to run, and all the other high profile administration Republicans are black- so what is the long term benefit of Bush hating? Portraying the Bush administration as racist isn't going to matter if Condi or Colin run, and claiming that any high profile Senate Republican is a warhawk won't work that well either when all the Democratic senators voted for the war too. Even if Bush's approval rating dropped below 10%, would that change the outcome of the 2008 election? Does anyone thing that there is going to be a significant enough "Bush-contamination" effect on the Republican nominee to influence the outcome of the election?
Now my question regarding the presidential election in 2008. For the last five years (and most likely for the next three) the Democratic platform has consisted of one issue- Bush hating (Incidentally, this issue also comes up while watching seventies porn, and no- I didn't write this just so I could use that joke). With Bush's approval numbers dropping below forty or so percent, many on the left have taken this as some kind of victory. However, I'm not sure if this strategy has any long term benefits for the Democrats. Bush is gone in 2008 regardless, Cheney isn't going to run, and all the other high profile administration Republicans are black- so what is the long term benefit of Bush hating? Portraying the Bush administration as racist isn't going to matter if Condi or Colin run, and claiming that any high profile Senate Republican is a warhawk won't work that well either when all the Democratic senators voted for the war too. Even if Bush's approval rating dropped below 10%, would that change the outcome of the 2008 election? Does anyone thing that there is going to be a significant enough "Bush-contamination" effect on the Republican nominee to influence the outcome of the election?
posted by Justin at 1:05 PM 
9 Comments:
I'll agree, as far as the future Bush hating will get Liberals nowhere. We pretty much just have to suck it up until 2008. I'll also agree that whoever gets voted in next, it would almost be impossible for it to be worse than now. We'll leave the arguing about why I hate Bush out of this and leave it at, you are correct, democrats have to come up with a new strategy besides Bush hate, I'm waiting for it too.
"I'll also agree that whoever gets voted in next, it would almost be impossible for it to be worse than now."
Does that count as the first optimistic thing I've heard from the left since... forever?
Optimism as opposed to what--Bush hating? Or optimism about a conservative?
I've got plenty of optimism, and unlike the Demoweasels, I have a plan.
I think that the liberal Bush-hating is roughly parrellel to the conservative Clinton-hating. What did it get the Republicans? Enough people pissed off enough to vote in the next election. My guess is that the democratic leadership -- assuming their making any sort of plan -- is thinking "do what works." If the Republicans won two terms for Bush after two terms of hating Clinton, why can't they? Hate alone is obviously not enough to beat an incumbant because neither Clinton nor Bush was displaced by hate. But apparently it might be enough to beat a newcomer. Now, you might argue that Gore is just an idiot and he lost because Bush is a better candidate. But I'm not so naive to assume that the average American is smart enough or cares enough to evaluate a politicans strengths and weaknesses. Most people only care about party, so if you get enough people in your party to vote you can run Bob Dole or John Kerry -- if you don't get enough then you look like idiots, as with Dole and Kerry. So, the dems are hoping that they can keep enough people pissed so they'll vote in '08. If the Republicans are relatively satisfied with the government then they won't care enough to get up out of their armchairs and vote. Forget the fact that losing means the other side wins (I know, thats kinda obvious) -- most people don't think that much. They think -- "the government is pissing me off, I'm going to change it". Or "things are going fine, I'm sure the right guy will win". So its all about making people upset enough to overcome laziness. Its sad, but I honestly believe that is what dictates the voting habits of at least 50% of the country, so that is all you need to win an election these days. The Republicans better make sure they can get their people good and pissed at the dems shortly before '08 -- thats what I'd look for. Conversly, they might try to get their own people mad at Bush and then characterize the new candidate as the person Bush should have been or something like that. But thats riskier, because when people are pissed they're more likely to vote against you than to trust that you'll get it right the next time around. Lock box.
I think, politically, it's not a bad strategy. Republicans got people to look at enough of Clinton's bad, completely villified the man, and then equated him with his party. Bush IS the image of his party - you can't think "republican" without thinking "president" right now. So if they sink Bush, they at least partially sink the republican image also. Whoever runs for the right in 08 is going to have to take a "Bush was great - I'll be just as good or better" platform.
Chuck, I'd vote for you. But I'd want a cabinet post out of it, and I'd be afraid that you'd flip flop. I can't believe you sold me out on this gorilla thing.
I wouldn't even need cabinet post. I'd settle for FEMA directorship... but I'd leak personal stories about you that I just made up to the press to get me a book deal.
hey i heard a good thing to invest in are those i think there called rfyd chips, they are chips that eliminate inventory hassles and do other things too they are pretty sweet and wallmart is requiring all companies they deal with to put these on all there products
standingout, killer analysis. Good work trying to think from the perspectives of the party leaders, and I like your equating of Clinton-hate to Bush-hate. 2008 might see a viable candidate on each side--or it might be World War III: the Hillary bloodbath. I can't tell yet.
redhurt, you can be State Comptroller. I have to go to Cambodia for Christmas.
Don't forget that most likely the Republicans will get to recycle Clinton hate for 2008! They could even put it on bumperstickers, it's catchy.
Post a Comment
<< Home