Another blog posting of mine on The Guardian's Comment Is Free group-blog....
In the final days of the congressional elections campaign, as the Democratic and Republican parties throw tens of millions of dollars into advertising in key House and Senate races, it's not too early to kick off the blame-game.With the pre-tally predictions favoring the Democrats, it's natural that the Republicans would start to worry about recriminations first. Dick Armey, the former Republican House majority leader, has been assailing Christian conservatives for forcing his party to neglect its small-government agenda in favor of divisive social matters, such as gay marriage and abortion. He has singled out James Dobson, the head of Focus on the Family, and has called such "self-appointed Christian leaders" as Dobson "thugs" and "bullies." (Dobson is also in the news of late for supporting Ted Haggard, the head of the National Association of Evangelicals, who was accused by a male prostitute of being one of his clients.)
At the same time, Armey has also pointed a finger at George W. Bush for mounting a war of "questionable necessity" that has alienated voters from the president's party. Newt Gingrich, the former Republican House Speaker who had to resign in part because of an extramarital affair, accused the Republicans he left behind in Congress of having "drifted away from reform and changed back to a standard political party"--meaning one marked by incompetence and corruption.
On this blog, Quin Hillyer, an editor of the conservative American Spectator, essentially accused Karl Rove of botching the mission. His argument is that the Republicans should have attacked the Democrats more vigorously. The sexually and racially charged ads deployed by the Republicans were apparently not enough. Nor were the repeated claims from Bush, Dick Cheney and other Republicans that Democrats are cut-and-runners who would undermine the country's national security (when they're not busy responding to invitations to gay weddings).
For years now, Bush has been trying to blur the national security issue and convince Americans the war in Iraq (which is not popular) is part of the war on terror (which is popular). He began the campaign season doing just that, making speeches on this point and pushing legislation regarding the detention and interrogation of suspected terrorists.
But he hit two snags. First, the legislation was opposed by leading (pro-war) Republicans: senators John McCain, John Warner, and Lindsey Graham. Bush lost his clean shot at the Democrats, who also opposed the measure.
Second, the war has become increasingly more ugly. This trumps all. The Republicans in Congress have hung themselves by following Bush like lapdogs. They have held few hearings about Iraq policy or the fraud and waste in the Iraq reconstruction program. They have tied themselves to Bush's mast and yielded control over their own fate. Attacking Democrats for disagreeing over the rules regarding the questioning of terrorist suspects could not distract voters from the war.
Hillyer also says the GOP should have made a fuss over Democratic attempts to block conservative judicial nominees. Yet only die-hard Republican voters care about that. And Republicans have them already. (If not, then all is indeed lost for Rove.) He also argues that the Republicans ought to have boasted more about the economy.
Yet despite the boosts in conventional economic indicators, a large majority of the public still feels the country is heading in the wrong direction. That could be because of Iraq. It also could be due to the fact that the growing economy has not yielded much of an increase in wage levels. (Corporate profits are far head of wage increases.) And at the same time, the traditional economic markers do not capture the growing sense of insecurity among American workers. Unemployment may be low, but these days many workers realize that their jobs (and/or benefits) could disappear in a flash. Bush and his party have nothing to say about this widespread and fundamental unease.
No doubt, the Republicans could have played their cards in a better fashion (and we don't know yet that they haven't). But even in politics, reality can shove aside rhetoric. And this election season, Bush could no longer keep the war-and his mismanagement of it-off center stage. If the Republicans do end up losing the House or the Senate, there will be an orgy of finger-pointing (or firebombing) within GOP circles that could well inflame already-present conflicts, such as the tension between libertarian conservatives, who want to minimize government, and social conservatives, who want to legislate morality.
On the Democratic side, there's no reason yet to form firing squads. But should the Democrats not win back at least the House of Representatives, there will be plenty of D-on-D violence. Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic Party, will have a lot of explaining to do-to no avail. So will Representative Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic leader in the House. And the Democrats will look more hapless than they have ever been. Whatever happens on Tuesday will be a prelude to much political intrigue and change in Washington.
Posted by David Corn at November 3, 2006 05:55 PM
