August 6, 2006

Identity Politics

Salena Zito looks at who the two parties think they are.

    Democrats face a struggle for identity -- witness the Joe Lieberman-Ned Lamont U.S. Senate primary in Connecticut, where the race is all about Lieberman's support for the war in Iraq.
    Republicans, on the other hand, face not so much a struggle for identity, but a battle.

    Fifteen years ago, Republicans confronted their identity crisis with Newt Gingrich and the "Contract with America." That revolution was designed to reunite everyone under one big tent.

    It is considered to have been successful because it has sustained a congressional majority based on reform, responsible government and a strong defense.

    It's also kept Republicans united, minimizing the inside-party battles that are consuming Democrats.

    The struggle now for Republicans is not about where the party stands as much as who is doing the standing on the soapbox.


Regarding the Democrats, I think the only thing unifying them is "we're not them." Them being Bush, their opponent (see Pa's Bob Casey) and Republicans in general.

A dubious electoral strategy at best. What are they for?

It depends who you ask. The Republicans, I believe, haven't had that problem.

Politics Posted by AlexC at August 6, 2006 10:08 AM

Will Casey Strike out?

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Protected/Articles/000/000/012/486msupo.asp?pg=1

Posted by: Sidney at August 6, 2006 10:41 AM

Speaking of Gingrich, he is fast becoming my preference for the GOP 2008 presidential candidate. One gets the impression that his hand at the foreign policy rudder would lead to a clearer implementation of the Bush Doctrine than has Bush's.

As far as the Democrats are concerned, their strength in the coming elections is to focus on domestic issues. Not that they have better ideas, or even a decided advantage there politically, but on foreign policy they've proven in the last 2 elections to be woefully insufficient.

Opinion polls routinely show Ds doing well against Rs in "approval rating" but when all the chips are actually on the table and the voters have to decide, a plurality understands that one party is serious about defending the nation while the other lives in dreamland.

The article Sidney links doesn't mention this, focusing more on PA "inside baseball" but it's another factor lined up in Santorum's column.

Posted by: johngalt at August 6, 2006 1:18 PM

I'd like to think Zito's right. Her points about the Democrats' troubles are certainly accurate (the fact that Donna Brazille is now a party moderate is a symptom).

The GOP's troubles are glossed over -- nay, ignored -- The Contract with America did unify the 104th Congress but the 109th has lost its way. We have Rep. Jerry Lewis and Sen. Ted Stevens shoveling money to their district, state, and supports as fast as they can. If it is "all about personality" than it's because nobody is left with any conservative ideology.

I'm a big fan of Speaker Gingrich, jg, but fear he brings too much baggage and too much history to lead the party in 2008. We could -- and probably will -- do much worse, but I don't see him winning in '08. He'd be a good choice for a principled loss a'la Dole in '96. But that's not what I want.

Posted by: jk at August 6, 2006 1:55 PM

I'm taking a 'wait and see' attitude about the '08 prez run. There are several political lifetimes between now and then.

As for baggage, how much more could one have that the current Oval Office holder did in 2000?

Posted by: johngalt at August 6, 2006 2:47 PM | What do you think? [4]