September 16, 2004
BETTER THE SACRIFICIAL LAMB THAN THE JUDAS GOAT:
Is Kerry moving left? (Robert Novak, September 16, 2004, Townhall)
Only two explanations are possible, and neither is reassuring to worried Democrats. Kerry could be making a conscious, though counterproductive, decision to reassure his liberal base. Or, he could be trapped by the calendar of events -- talking gun control because a deadline had been reached and talking civil rights because the Black Caucus invited him. Democratic strategists are particularly concerned by the latter explanation, suggesting a mindless campaign.The anxiety created by Kerry's return to gun control is concealed by the facade of serenity among Democrats. Their actual concern was exposed by Democratic activist Paul Begala, who has been assailed for advising the Kerry campaign while appearing as my co-host on CNN's "Crossfire." He said on Monday's program: "Anyone who's worried that I'm secretly running the Kerry campaign can rest easy . . . As an avid hunter and gun owner myself, I think Kerry's move is a political mistake, because Republicans are now going to try to scare hunters."
Kerry's emphasis on gun control contradicted not only Begala but also Begala's former boss, Bill Clinton. In his memoir, President Clinton names gun control as a principal cause of the 1994 Democratic election debacle. He asserts that "the Brady Bill (for screening of gun purchasers) and the assault weapons ban inflamed the Republican base voters and increased their turnout."
A consensus of Democratic leaders believes that in 2000, gun control delivered West Virginia -- and with it, the presidency -- to George W. Bush.
Fair-minded and generous as we are, we assume that the Kerry campaign has correctly determined that this election comes down to whether the Senator can stay above 40% personally and keep his party above 40% of the seats in Congress. Unless the base is highly motivated they won't achieve those goals, so running back to the Left is sensible, even somewhat selfless. The Senator's willingness to bail on his own chance of election in favor of keeping his party viable is praiseworthy.
MORE:
Gun Control Still One of the Great Divides Between GOP and Democrats (George Skelton, September 16, 2004, LA Times)
Want to control guns? Elect Democrats.Posted by Orrin Judd at September 16, 2004 10:44 AM
Margret Thatcher famously said 'There's no such thing as society'. I think we can also say that 'There's no such thing as the Kerry Campaign.'
Posted by: mike earl at September 16, 2004 10:52 AMI think this is more signs of a chaotic campaign rather than a conscious decision to minimize losses. Kerry is arrogant enough, surrounded by enough yes people, and there are enough Zogby polls to keep Kerry thinking that he is winning.
On a related note - Clinton blames '94 on gun control? what about HillaryCare? what about gays in the military? what about his other blunders?
"Clinton blames '94 on gun control? what about HillaryCare? what about gays in the military"
AWW
They are all part of the mix to round up 50%. Gays in the military hurt Clinton, but not all that much.
Can't rehash HillaryCare for you, but I will say that government provided medical care is very popular (unfortunately). Appealing to the electorate on that issue is the reason Republicans have now provided drug benefits to Seniors. Left to their own priorities, many Republicans (me) wouldn't have supported that type of benefit. So while HillarCare may have failed, Democrats are still in control of that issue and setting the agenda.
Posted by: h-man at September 16, 2004 11:13 AM--government provided medical care is very popular (unfortunately).--
That's only because they don't really know what's going on in Canada, Britain, Australia.
Read Colby Cosh's latest, you might have to scroll down.
Posted by: Sandy P at September 16, 2004 11:23 AMh-man:
Like Social Security reform and a myriad of other issues, government supplied health care is popular in theory but as Hillary discovered very dicey once you actually get down to details. Once the realities set in almost any specific plan will be very hard to pass.
Posted by: Jeff at September 16, 2004 12:36 PMThis is what it has come to: The always-pessimistic Robert Novak is saying the Democrats are in trouble.
Unless the media unearths Bush's toddler-aged love child, this election is history.
Posted by: Matt Murphy at September 16, 2004 12:48 PMSee also Dole '96.
Posted by: mike at September 16, 2004 1:34 PMWith the best will in the world, I can only see this as drift rather than strategy. He should move left, but to do so he needs to come out strongly against the war.
Posted by: David Cohen at September 16, 2004 2:57 PMI haven't misscalled an election since 1968, when I thought Humphrey had closed the gap on Nixon. Things are looking so good for Bush right now, I'm scared.
I honestly believe that Kerry knew that this year wqs his last chance, with Hillary a lock for the nomination in 2008, and that he took the leap into the fray knowing that he could win only if events (a disaster in Iraq, a sudden downturn in the economy, whatever) moved against Bush.
Posted by: Dan at September 16, 2004 3:40 PM