|
|
|
September 13, 2006
This fall, beat Bush!
I'm puzzled over something. While I've never been quite certain exactly how to define the Republican "base," I'm wondering whether the term has become code language for conservative opposition to President Bush. If so, then considering Bush's narrow victory in the last two elections, will this emerging base of dissenters be able to ensure victory if they gain control of the Republican Party? In a couple of elections yesterday, the dissident base's candidate lost one election, and won in another: PROVIDENCE, R.I. -- Republicans have a better chance of holding onto Rhode Island's Senate seat with a primary victory by the moderate incumbent.I don't know how accurate these polls are, as I'm largely unfamiliar with the demographics of Rhode Island. But if Pennsylvania is any indication, the victory of Arlen Specter (considered a RINO by most of the base) over the base's current leader Pat Toomey was followed by Specter's defeat of Jim Hoeffel by a considerable margin -- in a state in which Bush was defeated by Kerry. As to the base's victory in Arizona, will that be followed by a victory in November? The WaPo's Chris Cillizza doesn't think so: ...former state Rep. Randy Graf came out on top in the Republican primary in Arizona's open 8th congressional district -- virtually ensuring that Democrats will pick up that seat in November.If that is in fact as "virtually assured" as Cilliza says, then the base would appear to be putting a single issue ahead of party victory. Does that make political sense? In a post titled "Arizona GOPs Say 'Stop Bush!'" Mickey Kaus looks at the situation, and asks about the base: Isn't this more evidence that opposition to Bush's immigration plan is a powerful base-mobilizer for the GOP?(A phenomenon Glenn Reynolds calls "Republicans on the march to stop Bush.") If opposition to Bush is the way to mobilize the base, I'm wondering what that will mean in the fall. (I mean, Bush still being president and all that.) I'm also wondering whether the base might be suffering from its own version of BDS, to be cured only by a Hillary Clinton presidency, but I've already kvetched about it repeatedly. At the risk of getting ahead of the base, I'm beginning to think they more than want Hillary; they might need her. That's because being a minority in the minority beats having to be a minority in the majority. posted by Eric on 09.13.06 at 12:43 PM
Comments
I think I got it before your comment, but thanks! (I appreciate your being able to see what I meant, as it looked incomprehensible.) Eric Scheie · September 13, 2006 01:41 PM I live here in AZ. and as far as I see, there is no real "anti-Bush" sentiment amongst any GOP faction. There is a disappointment over Bush's stand on illegal immigration, but truth to tell, it is more of an "anti-McCain" sentiment than anything else. The hottest issue here seems to be illegal immigration (even amongst dems). This is especially true since our current governess (Janet Napolitano) is AWOL on this issue. I expect that this will play out big time over the next month as Janet tries to defend her record while Len Munsil challenges it. Even though the AZ. punditocracy has already written off Len, I would suggest it is early days as of yet. Len is trying a grass-roots campaign, whereas Janet is choosing a top-down approach. I would suggest that even if Janet win, she will be in for the fight of her life. I don't know about Kolbe's old district, but the GOP has a definate advantage there when it comes to illegal immigration issues. I expect the dem challenger there to try to avoid the issue and be anti-war. Furthermore, I expect him to do a bit of Bush bashing. This could work in the GOP's favor if they embrace Bush on the war with its successes and focus on immigration. Natrium · September 13, 2006 02:21 PM |
|
March 2007
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
March 2007
February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
• War For Profit
• How trying to prevent genocide becomes genocide • I Have Not Yet Begun To Fight • Wind Boom • Isaiah Washington, victim • Hippie Shirts • A cunning exercise in liberation linguistics? • Sometimes unprincipled demagogues are better than principled activists • PETA agrees -- with me! • The high pitched squeal of small carbon footprints
Links
Site Credits
|
|
"If so, then considering Bush's narrow victory in the last two elections, will this emerging base of dissenters be able to ensure victory is the gain control of the Republican Party?"
I'm thinking that perhaps the "is the" in the final clause should be "if they"?