October 10, 2002

THIRD WAY, NO WAY:

Focus on War Talk Hampers Democrats: Fears Grow Over Money, Turnout (Thomas B. Edsall, October 10, 2002, Washington Post)
"Our liberal base wants us to stand up and challenge Bush on the war," said Donna Brazile, who runs the Democratic National Committee's Voting Rights Institute and managed Al Gore's 2000 presidential campaign. She said loyal Democrats in low-income areas and black neighborhoods, along with many women and liberal suburbanites, are bitterly complaining that "no one is talking to us, no one is addressing our issues" on the economy and preparation for war. "There is a real danger out there."

For weeks, Democrats have acknowledged that the Iraq matter's dominance of the news has helped keep voter attention on an issue generally seen as beneficial to Bush and his fellow Republicans. Party insiders, however, are increasingly worried about the potential impact on fundamental mechanics that win or lose elections: fundraising and get-out-the-vote efforts.

Direct-mail donations to the DNC took a nosedive in August and September, party officials acknowledge. Several of them say a major cause is discontent over the acquiescence of many Democratic leaders to Bush's preparation for war with Iraq.

One Democratic strategist familiar with the situation said, "Democratic donors want the leadership to fight harder on Iraq. Instead, people see Democrats are not raising questions."

The most recent Washington Post survey conducted at the end of September shows that opposition to taking military action against Iraq is most intense among voters who constitute a significant portion of the Democratic base: those who strongly disapprove of Bush, liberals, blacks and, to a lesser extent, women. While 34 percent of all Americans oppose going to war against Iraq, the figure is 76 percent among those who strongly disapprove of Bush -- a group Democrats must rely on for donations and high voter turnout. [...]

A fundraising specialist said, "The people who give to the Republican and Democratic parties are the ones with the strongest ideological viewpoints. They are strong conservatives in the case of the Republicans, and strong liberals in the case of the Democrats. The Democratic donor base is inclined to oppose the president's actions in Iraq, and if the party is not doing that, it causes some problems."


This is the problem with Bill Clinton's New Democrat strategy and the rebellion against Tony Blair on Labour's back benches reflects the seem dilemma in Third Way Britain. It's all well and good to run as a moderate-conservative when you're just trying to gull voters, but when you get in office your loyalists expect you to toe the ideological line. For the modern Left that means a foreign policy that meets with UN approval.
Posted by Orrin Judd at October 10, 2002 10:32 AM
Comments for this post are closed.