Can History Save the Democrats?

New York Times ^ | November 7, 2004 | Dean E. Murphy

[SunkenCiv]

History suggests several possibilities for a major reshaping event - a national calamity, a deep schism in the ruling party, the implosion of a social movement under the excesses of its own agenda or the emergence of an extraordinary political figure. Lincoln became president and the Republicans first took national power when the Democrats tore themselves and the nation apart over slavery and secession. Another national trauma, the Great Depression, produced a sweeping realignment in favor of the Democrats and Franklin D. Roosevelt.

[SunkenCiv]

The Democretins are shredding before our eyes. All we need to do is encourage them, to give them enough rope to hang themselves, and of course, show up on election days.

[SunkenCiv]

G'night, I really mean it this time. :')

---

FR Lexicon:Posting Guidelines:Excerpt, or Link only?:Ultimate Sidebar Management:Headlines
PDF to HTML translation:Translation page:Wayback Machine:My Links:FreeMail Me
Gods, Graves, Glyphs topic:and group:Books, Magazines, Movies, Music

---

[Darkwolf377]

God, this endless handwringing for the poor, weeping democrats. Boo freakin hoo! Grow up!

[Boundless]

If the rank&file ever wake up to what the Clintons have done
to the party since taking ownership in 1992, do they have
any real mechanisms for dislodging these two gargolyes?

My impression is that since the DNC core is mostly Clinton
cronies, the only way to make any significant change will
be to splinter off an entirely new party.

[proudofthesouth]

I hope they don't survive another year! Stinking Commies!

[SunkenCiv]

EJ Dionne on "This Week" this morning was doing the fast shuffle trying to explain how GWB managed to win the election (and according to one of the other panelists, even Clinton never managed to win 50 per cent of the votes cast) despite the fact that "exit poll" data showed voters were against the war in Iraq by a 3:1 margin. Shows what one can do with phony data and a lot of wishful thinking. Another panelist claimed Kerry's loss had to do with Kerry himself -- that he had the right message, but that he was the wrong messenger. That panelist was half right. :') George Will did one of his calm, quiet, surgical strikes on those ideas, and it was fun to watch. :')

[Genoa]

See the thread at LGF. This op-ed piece seems to be suggesting "an act of God," such as the ones that ended the Lincoln and McKinley administrations. Read the whole piece.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/07/weekinreview/07murp.html?oref=login

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks for the advice.

[Genoa]

It would make a good thread at News and Activism too. It's really scandalous what this piece appears to be suggesting.

[SGCOS]

Kathleen Parker gives a good explanation here

[BellStar]

This crosses the line, the Secrete Service needs to step in soon!

[sarah_f]

It is my opinion they will try to assassinate Bush very soon, G-d forbid.

All the signs are there. This is the fifth outrageous assassination item I've heard about in recent memory. There was the movie, the book, the communist KIRO AM radio host, the Guardian piece, and now the NY TIMES.

The writing is on the wall and now in the newspapers.

These people need to be jailed indefinitely under the new terrorism laws. They are the enemy within; domestic terrorists, every bit as much as the muslims.

See Charles' description over at Little Green Footballs if you can. His analysis is spot on.

[SunkenCiv]

"Treason doth never prosper. What's the reason? If it prosper, none dare call it treason." I think the so-called act of god that has transformed the party balance of power was 9/11. That was not an act of god though. :') Sharon finally became PM of Israel, isolated Arafat, marginalized him, stopped listening to the EU, and built the Fence. 9/11 freed US foreign policy from subservience to the Saudis and OPEC, and restored US devotion to the proliferation of democracy and personal liberty (and free markets, which is indivisible from those) around the world.

Once the good times are rollin' again (by 2008), Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and perhaps Sudan are stable democracies, and US labor is busy drilling the ANWR, the Republican Party will still need a candidate who can defeat Hillary Clinton, the likely Dim nominee. Unless of course she's defeated (preferably, rejected in the primary election, but then, who would run against her? The so-called act of god would be for some vulnerability to emerge by then) in the 2006 NY senate race.

Maybe she'll snap and gun down Bill by then. That really would be an "act of god"...

[SunkenCiv]

hey, she's kinda cute...

"The folks who re-elected Bush not only voted for the man they felt best represents their interests, but also against a culture they see as alien and hostile. The Bush vote was equally a protest against Hollywood, an increasingly untrustworthy media and the puerile Michael Moore contingent."

Yeah, that sums it up pretty nicely.

The think I found interesting about the county results map for the reelection is that the counties with colleges and universities went with Kerry. Maybe that's one of those accidental, self-inflicted gerrymanders, but it could get more serious in 2008, because by then, even more of the Greatest Generation will be deceased (the youngest are now in their late 70s; although that may not be that big a deal, since they came of age under FDR and were born in the Great Depression), and the college age rads are unlikely to start acting their chronological age by then.

Plus, they'll be even more bitter than they were about the 2000 election, which most of them couldn't participate in anyway. "See, we almost did it in 2004," ignoring the fact that GWB got an actual majority (not just a plurality, first time since 1988 I think) and beat Kerry by three per cent of the vote. Some of that vote will fall away, particularly among those who have graduated and entered their careers by then. But I'd expect those 20-somethings to be motivated to vote, and of course, to vote for the Party of the Single Party State, iow, the Demagogic Party.

However, I don't expect the Hispanic vote to be particularly good for the Dims by then. I don't think the decades-long rubber-stamp vote from African-America is going to do anything but continue to fall away. Even more women will vote Republican -- unless of course Hillary runs, but I don't think Hillary has nearly as much appeal among women as people believe (or fear) that she does.

There is bound to be more Moslem support for the Dims, but that will be somewhat offset by more Jewish votes for the Pubbies (and hopefully, by immigration barriers, deportations, and imprisonment), and a more reliable election day turnout by Christians. I think the overall number of Christians has been on the increase in recent years (previously trending down), and Catholics in particular are not necessarily turned on by the pro-abortion stance of the Dims. For that matter, neither are African-Americans, as it's easy to make the case (and it has been made) that abortion on demand remains a program designed to reduce the numbers of minorities (Planned Parenthood having its eugenics roots).

People from India tend Republican, and need to be kept reminded of Hillary's convenience store stereotype.

Bedtime for me.

[SunkenCiv]

I see a couple of things happening in the near future (one of which really is my bedtime, but anyway). A whole bunch of leftwing loudmouth imbeciles will flunk out, or graduate without a viable degree. Thereafter, they'll be out! out! out! and will wind up like Jerry Rubin, taking out ads in the National Enquirer, and complaining that they're being oppressed by the corporate culture.

Propaganda in the school systems has been reduced by retirements, as the 30 years and out boomer radicals are vanishing from the scene. There is bound to be some problem with some here or there, but local taxpayers have recourse to the law and pressure on school boards etc.

Another thing that will happen, is that the somewhat chastened Dims still in political office will try to keep a low profile, not opposing the obviously popular policies of the reelected president and his growing numbers of party fellows in both houses of congress. The "lame duck" final two years of Bush's second term will be less of a problem for the president than it might otherwise have been because the 2006 midterm elections will go very, very well for his party.

Yet another thing that will happen -- bin Laden will be captured, or his body will be recovered after a smart bomb smokes his miserable ass. Similar fates await the other terrorist leaders around the world, including the Moslem mass-murderers in Sudan.

g'night (for real this time).

[SunkenCiv]

I'd be surprised to see anyone but Hillary run for the presidency in 2008. However, beating her ass in 2006 may be as simple as saying, "look, she's not going to be around because she really wants to run for president a year or so after getting sworn in to her second term." And if there's a Republican governor, guess who appoints her successor? ;')

g'night all (no, really, I mean it).