« | »

Reuters: Democrats Better Back Off On Iraq

From the DNC’s Reuters:

Photo

Democrat split on Iraq may hurt ’08 chances: analysts

By David Alexander

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Failure to end the Iraq war has so divided Democrats it could jeopardize their chances of consolidating power in U.S. elections in November 2008, analysts said.

Nearly a year since the party parlayed discontent over the unpopular war into a majority in Congress, liberal Democrats, prodded by influential Internet bloggers, are pressing harder than ever for action to bring U.S. troops home.

Centrists, concerned about alienating conservative voters in swing districts, are wary of moving too precipitously, the analysts say.

The bottom line for Democrats was that they won a majority by picking up seats in marginal or nominally Republican districts, said Ethan Siegal, an analyst for The Washington Exchange, which monitors Congress for institutional investors.

“If the Democrats want to keep control of the House in the 2008 elections, they can’t force those members to take certain Iraq votes, he said.

Democratic divisions may grow after Gen. David Petraeus, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, reports to Congress in September on the results of President George W. Bush’s policy of building up troops as a way to stabilize Iraq.

Even a positive report is unlikely to sway the anti-war liberal Democrats, but it will make it difficult for centrist Democrats from more conservative districts to support pulling out troops, the analysts said.

Democrats who had hesitated to vote for timetables and various withdrawal schemes “are going to be even more hesitant now,” Siegal said.

“It will be the Democratic left, which is probably immune to any news of success in Iraq, against the middle-of-the-road America,” said Matthew Woessner, a political expert at Pennsylvania State University.

A nightmare scenario for any party is when the pressure, the sum total of the pressures from their constituency groups, are out of step with mainstream America. That’s a prescription for electoral disaster,” he added.

And liberal Democrats, who felt marginalized by President Bill Clinton and his centrist supporters in the 1990s, don’t seem inclined to let up. They have gained substantial influence in the party over the past decade with a well-organized network of bloggers, fund-raisers and activists linked through the Internet.

Successful bloggers, like Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas Zuniga, regularly use the Internet to debate ideas, editorialize and criticize Democrats who compromise liberal principles. Fund-raising sites like ActBlue.com have collected tens of millions of dollars for Democratic candidates.

“The explosion of the success of the left-wing blogosphere has placed the Democrats under even more pressure from their left,” Woessner said.

Democrats know they can tap into online activists for resources, money and time.

But the electoral map limits how far the party can move to the left if Democrats hope to retain power in Congress and build their majority, Siegal said.

“The Democrats can’t control the House and the Senate unless they elect centrists also,” he said. “And they can’t elect their centrists by having a totally liberal agenda.”

The success of liberal Democrats in prodding the party to the left has begun to draw expressions of concern from centrists.

“Some liberals are so confident about Democratic prospects that they contend the centrism that vaulted Democrats to victory in the 1990s no longer matters,” former Rep. Harold Ford Jr. of Tennessee, the head of centrist Democratic Leadership Council, and Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley wrote in The Washington Post.

This is quite amazing advice, coming from Reuters.

The article starts off in one place (with the usual leftwing lies about how the Democrats won in 2006 due to their anti-Iraq war position), but then veers dangerously close to the truth.

And it basically ends by telling their bosses at the DNC that they had better ignore the nutroots like Kos and think about how the Clintons clung onto power in the 1990s. (Even if it means lying about the Clintons’ actually liberal policies.)

So now even Reuters can see that the Democrats’ insistence on defeat in Iraq will be a losing campaign strategy.

But the odds are this sage advice will go unheeded, as the Democrats’ hatred of this country will trump even their overwhelming thirst for power.

This article was posted by Steve on Wednesday, August 22nd, 2007. Comments are currently closed.

2 Responses to “Reuters: Democrats Better Back Off On Iraq”

Sorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.


« Front Page | To Top
« | »